Posted on 10/19/2001 7:50:18 PM PDT by Ranger
WASHINGTON: As usual while keeping its cards to its chest, the Iranian government is ensuring that against the backdrop of Operation Enduring Freedom Tehran covers all the flanks on the Afghanistan front. As it has deftly though discreetly done in the past.
Focused clearly on what interests -- economic and political --they must pursue in Afghanistan, the Iranians have let flexibility define their Afghan policy. While never letting ideology or dogma hinder their pragmatic policies, successive governments in Tehran have played on different, often opposing fronts, to appease various sections of the Iranian public and establishment. Thus on optics and substance both, Iran's Afghan policy has done well.
Whatever the public rhetoric against the United States and its anti-terrorism military operation in Afghanistan, President Khatami's government responded positively to the US administration's request that the Iranian government "rescue any American military personnel in distress in its territory". A fact acknowledged, according to the US media, both by the Iranian and US officials.
According to the reports on October 7 the Bush administration sent a message through the Swiss government assuring Iran that during the military operation the US government would respect Iran's territorial integrity and its airspace. More importantly the Swiss carried the US request that Iran assist those Americans who maybe shot down, escape into or are forced to land on the Iranian territory. Within 24 hours on October 8 the Swiss intermediaries carried back a prompt and positive response from the Iranian government. The Iranians agreed to rescue any American military personnel who landed on their territory and was "in distress".
Failure of the collective Russian, Iranian, Indian and the US efforts to engineer a political and military rollback of the Taliban provided the opening for direct Iran-US diplomatic re-engagement. Early May senior US State Department and Iranian officials met in Geneva, along with the Germans and Italians to evolve a strategy for dislodging the Taliban and on the formation of a successor "broad-based" Afghan government.
In the meeting, Iranian officials had sought assurance from the US delegation that the US would not adopt a hands-off approach towards Afghanistan after Osama bin Laden was either captured or surrendered to them. Clearly the Iranians, even before September 11 had look towards the US as a key partner in any plan to dismantle the Taliban regime. Since September 11, however, Iranian and the American officials have met in Geneva twice to discuss various options for a future Afghan government.
Iran's Afghan policy at least in the recent years has been one of deliberate duality. Seemingly, one fraught with contradictions. For example Tehran has been the most vocal critic of the Taliban in the Six-plus-two group, at the UN and at other multilateral forums like the ECO. Iran has continued to militarily, financially and politically support the Northern Alliance in their four-year long battle against the Taliban and has also played host to various Afghan mujahideen leaders and commanders ranging from Gulbadeen Hikmatyar, Professor Sayyaf, Ismail Khan, Professor Rabbani, Khalili of Hizb-i-Wahadat and others.
Yet alongside all this anti-Taliban activity, Tehran opened its border at Killa Islam in 1999 after UN imposed sanctions on the Taliban denying the Afghan carrier Ariana to operate international flights. Also Pakistani pressure on the talibaan over the issue of transit trade prompted the talibaan to look for other trade routes. Iran obliged by opening Killa Ismail trade route. Iranian goods have since flooded the Afghan markets.
On the humanitarian and economic front, the Iranian government provided major support in agriculture and health sectors to the talibaan government especially in Herat and Kandahar area. Following the same pattern in the post-September 11 period, the Iranians reportedly held a meeting with the talibaan at the Iran-Afghan border to assure the talibaan that Iran opposed the US military operation against Afghanistan.
The talibaan were assured that Iranian territory will not be used for staging attacks against Afghanistan and Iran itself will undertake no military action against the talibaan government. Ayatullah Khamenai in his Friday khutba attended by thousands in Tehran has criticised the US for its military action against Afghanistan. Huge protest rallies, normally organised by the government, have also strongly condemned US military action.
All this criticism notwithstanding, according to press reports, early this month the Iranian government invited western envoys to let them know that the Iranian government also believed that Osama's group could be linked to the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US. The envoys were assured that Iran was against terrorism and would cooperate with the anti-terrorist coalition by sharing intelligence information with them. The British Secretary for External Affairs was given this assurance during his early October trip to Tehran.
Iran has in fact attempted to balance its extremely low key but definite support for the US-led anti-terrorist coalition in the form of intelligence sharing, support to military personnel in distress, coordinating with the US support for a future Afghan government and for the Northern Alliance. Today Iran is cited in the streets of the Muslim world for the anti-American position it has taken over Afghanistan. It goes to Tehran's skilful conduct and selective projection of its operational policy that few talk about the support Iran will be providing to the US-led military operation.
Tehran, despite all the political turmoil in Afghanistan and the conservative-versus-reformists battling inside Iran, has been prudent in the pursuit of its interests in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, Washington too has opted to compartmentalize its differing Iran-related policy objectives. Ignoring Iran's involvement with groups the US government has labelled as terrorists, Washington for now is keen to play up the positives. For example in last week's briefing the head of USAID praised Iran for its "excellent cooperation" on the relief front.
Wheat provided by the US is being shipped by the World Food Programme overland from Iran into Afghanistan. Clearly for as long as the US military operation lasts in Afghanistan the Iran-US diplomatic engagement too will be sustained. Also for critics in the Bush administration, of the policy of dual containment, of Iran and Iraq, this limited engagement with Iran may open the possibility of reviving a relationship that has been in the cold storage for over two decades.
...the Bush administration sent a message through the Swiss government assuring Iran that during the military operation the US government would respect Iran's territorial integrity and its airspace. More importantly the Swiss carried the US request that Iran assist those Americans who maybe shot down, escape into or are forced to land on the Iranian territory. Within 24 hours on October 8 the Swiss intermediaries carried back a prompt and positive response from the Iranian government. The Iranians agreed to rescue any American military personnel who landed on their territory and was "in distress".
What this probably means is that Iran will tacitly allow us to use their airspace on a case by case basis. The only way the Islamic wacko-on-the-street would know is if somehow one of our pilots was shot down.
Now they have a built-in "humanitarian" explanation in the unlikely event that might occur.
It also sets up Iran's old nemesis for a nice pincer move down the road. Remember how Iran allowed Iraq to stash fighter jets during the Gulf War? Bush II isn't making the same mistake as Bush I by leaving Iran out of the coalition.
This one is fascinating. My first thought was that if it wasn't for the fanatical Religious Supreme Council (or whatever it is called) that outpowers the Iranian parliament, Prime Minister Khatami would roll his armies into Kabul with us arm in arm. An Iranian immigrant I know said that Bush's congress speech, where he said something like "We support the elected leaders of the region" was a nod to Khatami. I believe it. That speech had a lot of direct messages to various countries, e.g., Uzbekistan, Phillipines (Mindanao is our next stop, methinks.)
I regretted Iran's seeming pull back from us after initial sympathy and contacts after 911--but this article shows their game, perhaps. Play for the muslim street (the only govt. doing so openly) while serving, to a limited degree, their obvious best interests: get rid of the Taleban. Iran, amazingly, is the other country than the USA the Taleban has issued a fatwa against!
But Iran's playing to the moslem street without a twinge of guilt over their double-dealing shows that they are perhaps dangerous in the future....
Taliban_List
Go here:
and then click the Taliban_List topic to initiate the search! !
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.