Battling it out at the UN: Potholes overshadow US-Iran confrontation
By James M. Dorsey
A podcast version of this article is available at https://soundcloud.com/user-153425019/battling-it-out-at-the-un-potholes-overshadow-us-iran-confrontation
It’s easy to dismiss Iranian denunciations of the United
States and its Middle Eastern allies as part of the Islamic republic's
long-standing rhetoric. The rhetoric makes it equally easy to understand American
distrust.
But as President J. Trump and Hassan Rouhani, his Iranian
counterpart, gear up for two
days of diplomatic sabre rattling at the United Nations in advance
of next month's imposition of a second round of harsh US sanctions, both men
risk fuelling a conflict that could escalate out of hand.
Both are scheduled to address the UN general assembly on
Tuesday and Mr. Trump is slated to chair a meeting on Wednesday of the Security
Council expected to focus on Iran.
Adding to the likely drama at the UN, European Union foreign
policy chief Federica Mogherini, speaking alongside Iranian Foreign Minister
Mohammad Javad Zarif, snubbed
Mr. Trump, by announcing the creation of a payment system that would
allow oil companies and businesses to continue trading with Iran despite US
sanctions.
The risk of escalation is enhanced by the fact that Messrs.
Trump and Rouhani are sending mixed messages.
Mr. Trump's administration insists that its confrontational
approach is designed to alter
Iranian behaviour and curb its policies, not topple its regime.
Yet, the administration stepped up its engagement with exile
groups associated with the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, a controversial Saudi-backed
organization that calls for the violent overthrow of the government in Tehran
and enjoys support among current and former Western officials, as Messrs. Trump
and Rouhani battle it out at the UN.
John Bolton, who has repeatedly advocated regime change
before becoming Mr. Trump’s national security advisor, is scheduled to give a keynote
address at the United Against Nuclear Iran’s (UANI) annual summit
during the UN assembly. So is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, another hardliner
on Iran.
Mr. Pompeo and Mr, Bolton, who has spoken in the past at
events related to the Mujahedeen, had so far since coming to office refrained
from addressing gatherings associated with opposition groups.
The administration left that to Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer,
Rudolph Giuliani, who last weekend told the Iran Uprising Summit organized by
the Organization of
Iranian-American Communities, a Washington-based group associated
with the Mujahedeen and attended by the exile’s leader, Maryam Rajavi, that US.
sanctions were causing economic pain and could lead to a “successful
revolution” in Iran.
“I don’t know when we’re going to overthrow them. It could
be in a few days, months, a couple of years. But it’s going to happen,” Mr.
Giuliani, said speaking on the day of an attack
on a military march in the southern Iranian city of Ahvaz that
killed 25 people and wounded at least 70 others.
Messrs. Bolton, Pompeo and Giuliani’s hardline stems from US
suspicions rooted in anti-American and anti-Western attitudes that are grafted
in the Islamic republic's DNA and produced the 444-day occupation in 1979 of
the US Embassy in Tehran. They are reinforced by the humiliation of a failed US
military operation to rescue 66 Americans held hostages during the occupation.
Iranian rhetoric; bombastic threats against Israel; denial
of the Holocaust, support for anti-American insurgents in Iraq, the brutal regime
of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi rebels in
Yemen and Hamas in the Gaza Strip; propagation of religiously inspired republican
government as an alternative to conservative monarchy in the Gulf; and degrees
of duplicity regarding its nuclear program, reaffirm America's suspicion.
Iran's seemingly mirror image of the United States traces
its roots further back to the 1953 US-supported overthrow of the nationalist
government of prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh and his replacement by Shah
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi whom Washington staunchly supported till his fall in
1979.
Iranian concerns were reinforced by American backing of Iraq
in the 1980s Gulf war, US support for Kurdish and Baloch insurgents, the broad
spectrum of support of former and serving US officials for the
Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, unequivocal
Saudi signals of support for ethnic strife as a strategy to destabilize Iran,
and Mr. Trump's withdrawal from the 2015 international agreement to curb Iran's
nuclear program despite confirmation of its adherence to the accord.
Responses by the US and its Gulf allies as well as a series
of statements by militant Iranian Arab groups, including the Ahvaz Resistance
Movement, suspected of being responsible for this weekend's attack, have only
deepened Iranian distrust.
Those statements included one by the Arab Liberation
Movement for the Liberation of Ahwaz effusively
praising Saudi Arabia on its national day that the kingdom
celebrated a day after the attack.
Yadollah Javani, the deputy commander of Iran’s
Revolutionary Guard Corps, the target of the attack, vowed revenge for what he
termed years
of conspiracies against the Iranian revolution by its enemies.
Mr. Javani was referring to past US attempts to destabilize
Iran and a four-decade long global Saudi campaign that included backing of Iraq
in the Gulf war during the 1980s and an estimated $100
billion investment in support of anti-Iranian, anti-Shiite ultra-conservative
Sunni Muslim groups.
All of this means that mounting hostility between the United
States and Iran is muddied as much by fact as by perception – a combustible mix
that is easily exploitable by parties on both sides of the divide seeking to raise
the ante.
Dr.
James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International
Studies, co-director of the University of Würzburg’s Institute for Fan Culture,
and co-host of the New Books in Middle Eastern Studies podcast.
James is the author of The Turbulent World
of Middle East Soccer blog, a book with the same title and a co-authored
volume, Comparative Political Transitions between Southeast Asia and
the Middle East and North Africa as well as Shifting
Sands, Essays on Sports and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa
and just published China
and the Middle East: Venturing into the Maelstrom
Comments
Post a Comment