Henry Precht was a political-military officer and a diplomat in Iran before the 1979 revolution. He also held a very important post at the Iran desk at the State Department when he was in charge of major negotiations with Iran during the hostage crisis.
He, like many of his former colleagues such as Bruce Laingen and John Limbert, two former diplomats and both hostages in Tehran argues for negotiations and talks with the Islamic Republic of Iran. In a very volatile situation in the Middle East and with the upcoming swear-in ceremony of Barak Obama on January 20th 2009 as the 44th President of the United States, I had a chance to interview this former American official whose views on the future of US-Iran relations are balanced and to the point. Henry is also the author of the book ”A Diplomat's Progress."
Rooz ( R): The 30th anniversary of the Iranian revolution is coming up in less than a month. How do you see the situation now compared to thirty years aso? Do you think Iran has taken a course for the worse?
Henry Precht (HP): When the revolution brought the Khomeini forces to power, I thought their inexperience in governing did not augur well for success over the long term. That Iran survives in the face of 30 years of war and harsh pressure from outside testifies to the genius of the Iranian people. While the country is not the free society many hoped for with the fall of the Shah's regime, it is a country that is evolving in that direction – slowly and with many setbacks.
R: The election of Ahmadinejad has brought to power a group of ultra-conservatives in the government, do you think that this is similar to the beginning of the revolution when the nationalists and moderates were slowly put aside and pro-Khomeini forces took over.
HP: Iran now has a conservative/populist government; this succeeds a reformist one which followed a conservative/pragmatic regime. What comes next? The important thing to remember (and adjust to) is that Iran now has real politics – unlike in the days of the Shah. If people are unhappy with the ruling group, they can express their opposition in elections. It is unfortunate that the ruling authorities did not learn the major lesson from the Pahlavis that freedom of expression and fair elections are essential for a stable country. I expect those defects will be corrected in time – perhaps a long time. But I have confidence in the Iranian people to get it right eventually – as Americans seem to have after 8 years of George Bush.
R: In recent months, the wave of arrest and pressure on the civil society in Iran has intensified. Shirin Ebadi’s office was ransacked and her human rights organization was shut down. Why do you think this is happening now?
HP: The crackdown on human rights activists is a symptom of the present regime's insecurity and the consequence of sensitivity to any criticism. In part, this comes from the fear of American and Israeli rhetoric and actions designed to destabilize the country and change the regime. In a sense, opponents of the Tehran regime fare better than their counterparts in many Arab capitals. But that is hardly a justification for the tough measures against them.
R: You were at the Iran desk at the State Department when the hostages were taken at the US embassy in Tehran in 1979, and you were involved in some of the negotiations to release them. What is your take on why the US embassy was seized and how did you deal with the situation as a diplomat?
HP: The embassy was seized by a group of radical students seeking to make a statement against American links to the Shah and its supposed influence in Iran. When their action was praised by Khomeini and the embassy occupation was taken over by radical clerics, hope for an early end to the crisis disappeared. The crisis hurt Iran badly and sensible men among the Iranian elite understood the damage being done. I believe the inexperience of the Iranian leadership complicated a resolution of the problem. They simply did not know how to end it without appearing to suffer defeat and a bad mark against their movement. Our job of trying to negotiate an end to the crisis was complicated – to say the least – by the refusal of almost all Iranian leaders to have any direct or indirect contact with us.
R: In a previous interview I did with you, you mentioned that an Israeli official warned US officials in Iran that the clergy was gaining ground; this was a few years before 1979, but that none of the Americans on the ground listened. Why not? Why was this not taken seriously?
HP: During the Shah's rule, Washington did not want to upset him by delving into his opposition. As we knew little about them, we supposed that they did not constitute a threat to his governance. The American embassy knew little of Khomeini or his associates in Iran (many of whom were in prison and out of our reach.) Until 1978 there was little obvious evidence from the public that the regime was under threat.
R: In an article published recently in the Los Angeles Times, it is claimed that prior to the Shah’s departure, Western allies had decided to get rid of the Shah’s regime, do you agree with this statement?
HP: I believe, the United States and other Western countries supported the Shah's regime until the very end. Some towards the end doubted his ability to survive, but none acted against him.
R: Do you believe with the change in administration and the Obama presidency, there will be a different US policy towards the Middle East in general and Iran specifically?
HP: I desperately hope that the Obama Administration will give America a new face in the Middle East and that it will bring new and pragmatic (not ideological) ideas to bear on the problems of the region – including, of course, Iran. Direct talks between the U.S. and Iran have been promised by Obama.
R: The recent air strikes and ground invasion of Gaza by the Israeli army and the brutal killing of civilians has left a lot of people especially in the Arab world shocked and disgusted with the one-sided stance of the US when it comes to Israel. Do you believe Obama will take a different approach?
HP: I also desperately hope that Obama will take a more balanced approach to the Israel-Palestine dispute and, more specifically, to the terrible events in Gaza.
R: Has anyone from the new administration approached you for policy advice? And what would that be if you were asked?
HP: No one from the new Administration has been in touch with me and I would not expect them to do so. I was last in Iran 30 years ago and it would be better that people with a better informed and fresh outlook addressed the problem. My advice, for what it is worth, would be to treat Iran as a normal country. Put the harsh, anti-regime rhetoric behind us and look for common ground in order to reduce tensions and resolve problems.
