Pessimism Over US Nuclear Talks
Despite public’s relatively positive outlook towards America, reactions to Iran-US talks have been muted and lukewarm.
Pessimism Over US Nuclear Talks
Despite public’s relatively positive outlook towards America, reactions to Iran-US talks have been muted and lukewarm.
As the United States and Iran prepare for negotiations on the latter’s nuclear programme, many Iranians seem to be torn between different views of the objectives and likely consequences of the talks.
For some of those who are unhappy with the current government, the talks evoke memories of the 1953 CIA-led coup which brought back to power an undemocratic government and then helped that government consolidate power for the next 25 years.
Although most Iranians understand today’s different circumstances, they worry about a consolidation of authoritarian rule once a relationship is established with the US – such is the hold the subject of relations with Washington has over the Iranian public’s imagination.
It is a regular topic of conversation from taxis to family or intellectual gatherings: what is the American position regarding the protest movement? Does the US support the protest movement or does it not care? How will it deal with a government that speaks loudly against the US and yet seems very eager to strike a deal? And in the midst of all this, what will happen to Iran’s position on the nuclear subject after years of strident talk about not giving an inch on its sovereign rights?
Pretty much everyone cares about relations with America and this sensitivity has heightened in the past few months even if opinions vary. Some think the US has the power to decide the survival or continuation of the regime. People once held the same view about Britain, essentially seeing the continued survival of the regime or any other political group as made only possible by American will and support.
It is often said that despite the anti-Americanism of the leadership, the Iranian people have a positive view of the US and certainly many would like to travel or even emigrate there for a variety of reasons.
For ten-year-old Shirin, America means the home of her aunts and cousins. “I would like to see my aunt’s home in New York. My aunt and cousins come to Iran every year and I would like to go there too,” she said.
For older youth, the US is a place for higher education and work. The open doors of American universities to Iran’s best students, despite visa restrictions, have kept the aspirations and ambitions of Iranian college graduates alive. Ali, with a degree in metallurgy from Iran’s best technology university, was accepted with a full scholarship from the University of Illinois two years ago but was denied a visa. He says now that conditions have changed, he will try again.
The wave of immigration to the US after the 1979 revolution has also resulted in many parents travelling to there to visit their children and grand children. A 62-year mother said, “A place where your child and grandchild live gradually becomes a place with which you develop an affinity as well. Over there is also my home, my son’s home, even if it is a different country.”
These reactions suggest that along with the image the government has tried to build regarding the US, there is also an understanding based on individual experiences with which the authorities have not been able to interfere.
Despite the public’s relatively positive outlook towards America, reactions to the Iran-US talks have been muted and lukewarm. Different groups have differing reasons for their pessimism.
For opponents of the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the main reason is linked to their unhappiness with the way the election was conducted and the subsequent efforts by the government to represent their protests as illegitimate.
Explaining her concern, a college graduate who has chosen to be a homemaker, said, “America is following her own interests and for her it doesn’t make any difference who is in power. The current government [in Iran] that appears anti-American is willing to do any deal to save itself from its current difficulties and this is not to Iran’s benefit. This is not a fair negotiation.”
Idealistic students, who are the backbone of political protest, are also unhappy with the talks. A student activist, from Amir Kabir Technical University, said, “We expected the United States government and particularly [President Barack] Obama, who claims to support democracy and human rights, to appreciate Iran’s democratic protest movement and not to recognise a government that has run roughshod over the rules by engaging in dialogue.”
Another student, from Elm va Sanat University, said, “With this action America has proved that there is no difference between the Bush and Obama administrations and all the claims of democracy and human rights are empty, merely slogans.”
Intellectuals seem to belong to the pessimist camp as well but express their concerns in terms of the national interest. A prominent writer and translator said of the talks, “The reality is that the United States has a problem in Afghanistan and one of the ways to solve the Afghan crisis is to talk to Iran. Iran has also been showing interest in talks for while, almost since the early days of the Islamic Republic.”
But the author goes on to say, “This is not a suitable time for talks. Serious protests against the government have begun in society and people say that the United States was looking for a weak government like the current one to talk to since it can exact more concessions from it.
“In the midst of domestic turmoil, this can revive the memory of the role the United States played in the overthrow of the democratic government of Dr Mossadeq in 1953, in support of the fugitive Shah, and deepen the Iran-US crisis.”
And many people seem hesitant in their support of the talks because they object to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and Ahmadinejad acting as winners; not winners in talks with the US but winners of the power struggle inside Iran.
People look around at Iran’s position today and conclude that they want a resolution of its 30-year America problem. They just don’t want the talks to be conducted by someone they do not consider to represent their views.
Yasaman Baji is the pseudonym of a journalist in Tehran.
