Iran Warily Confronts New Neighbors: Americans

NY Times ^ | April 13, 2003 | ELAINE SCIOLINO

[Pharmboy]

An American rocket killed a 13-year-old boy. A second injured three people; a third struck an empty Oil Ministry depot. These were not precision strikes in Iraq. They were rockets gone astray, landing in Iran.

Yet Iran's Islamic Republic has chosen to ignore the attacks. Despite its troubled history with the United States, it has shown no inclination to provoke it militarily.

During the war next door, in fact, the official policy has been one of "active neutrality," which allowed the United States to prosecute the war even as Iran's officials denounced it.

But last week, as the war appeared to be nearing a moment of decisive victory for the Americans, Iranians at all political, economic and social levels were asking one question: What happens to us now?

Certainly no one in Iran knows. But Iranian officials are determined to survive by getting along with whatever government emerges in the aftermath of an American victory — and perhaps even by talking to the United States.

The civil disorder that followed the collapse of Saddam Hussein's authority was deeply disturbing for Iranians, who worried that it might spill across their borders. Iran fought its own eight-year war against Iraq two decades ago, a conflict waged largely on Iranian territory that crippled Iran's economy and killed at least 300,000 Iranians. That experience has left many Iranians ambivalent about America's triumphal entry into the center of Baghdad. Mr. Hussein, who was often described in Iran as "bloodthirsty," has no Iranian defenders. But the fact that he seems to have been so swiftly defeated by Iran's other arch-enemy is unsettling.

Night after night in the war's opening days, the conservative state-run television ran reports of heroic opposition by the Iraqi people to American tanks and fighter planes, predicting that the United States would fall into a quagmire.

But Iran is a place where, despite episodic repression, there is also a lively press — both reformist and conservative — as well as easy Internet access and illegal satellite television. After the Americans reached downtown Baghdad, the reformist newspaper Yas-e-No published the headline, "Saddam Ran Away," and the conservative paper Resalat wrote, "Baghdad was taken over without a fight." So the propaganda fell flat.

The official unease with the war was clearly illustrated in the stance of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's spiritual leader, who had referred to it as a "new form of Hitlerism." In a sermon on Friday, after saying that Iran is "happy about Saddam's departure," he added that American plans to install a transitional military administration in Baghdad amounted to "a bigger dictatorship" than that of Mr. Hussein.

Iranians at all levels know that their next-door neighbor is about to be occupied for an unknown period by the United States, and that this may change a great many things. Iran is still technically in a state of war with Iraq; both sides still hold prisoners of war, and Iran is still demanding billions of dollars in war reparations (an unrealistic goal given that Iran continued the war for years after Iraq wanted to end it). A grim illustration of the unfinished business of the Iran-Iraq war was the discovery by British soldiers last week of the remains of 200 people at a military base near Basra. They turned out to be Iranian soldiers killed in the 1980's.

Another major issue will be access to Najaf and Kerbala, two of the holiest shrines in Shiite Islam — the faith to which 80 percent of Iranians subscribe. Mr. Hussein kept the shrines largely closed to Iranian pilgrims. A new government that represents all Iraqis, about 60 percent of whom are Shiite Muslims, would find it hard not to open up the shrines to the hundreds of thousands of Iranians a year who would want to come.

The fate of the Mujahedeen Khalq, an Iranian opposition group long based in Iraq under Mr. Hussein's protection, is unclear. Iran will also need a working relationship with Iraqi Shiite groups, who stand to gain a degree of political power. Finally, the fall of Mr. Hussein has raised the prospect of legally recognized autonomy for Iraq's Kurds, which frightens Iran as much as it does Turkey and Syria. All three have Kurdish populations bordering Iraq.

The war has also reignited an intriguing debate among Iranian officials and intellectuals about whether it is in Iran's interest to begin a diplomatic dialogue with the United States. The coordinating council of groups in the reformist camp issued a declaration last Thursday warning that "authoritarian regimes create the context for foreign involvement," adding that talking to the United States does not mean acceptance of its behavior. On the same day, a Web site connected to the reformist Mosharekat party, quoted Iran's elected president, Mohammad Khatami, saying in a closed meeting of cabinet and parliamentary leaders that "talking with the United States is in the interests of Iran." Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president who is head of the powerful government oversight body known as the Expediency Council, is quoted by the same Web site as saying that if the parliament proposed talks with the United States and sent a plan to his council, "we will consider it."

There are, of course, huge issues that aggravate the American-Iranian relationship. The United States has long demanded that the Islamic Republic halt what American officials say is an active program to build nuclear weapons, and that it end support for anti-Israeli militias like Hezbollah. And many Iranians wonder whether, as part of what Mr. Bush has called an "axis of evil," they will be next on the list for a pre-emptive attack.

Many Iranians remember a C.I.A.-led coup half a century ago that overthrew the government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and reinstated the monarchy. And such fears were only heightened two weeks ago, when Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld warned Iran not to allow Iraqi opposition troops based on Iranian soil to enter Iraq, saying that the United States would treat them as combatants and hold the Iranian government responsible.

Last week, though, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell tried to calm the waters, telling the London-based newspaper Al Hayat, "There is a constant desire by everybody to accuse us of invasion operations." That, he added, "won't take place."

No matter what the United States does, Iranian officials insist they will find a way to deal with whoever comes to power in Iraq.

"We don't have a choice of neighborhood," said Javad Zarif, Iran's ambassador to the United Nations. "We have to do the best we can to live in peace and tranquillity with our neighbors."

[Pharmboy]

But Iranian officials are determined to survive by getting along with whatever government emerges in the aftermath of an American victory — and perhaps even by talking to the United States.

I admit, we're a tad hard to ignore these days.

And, if I were in charge, I would open those Shiite holy sites to Iranians ASAP.

[Support Free Republic]

---

He Pledges his Allegiance to the Left
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[CONSERVE]

What can they say we have the in a pincher hold iraq to the east and afghanistan to the west.

[harpseal]

First, thanks for the post.

Second, the Iranians have seen what we did to Saddam's military and they understand they had better start playing nice.

The next thing is a little unpleasent as only excerpts from NY Times articles are allowed. Don't be surprised at a Zot on this article for that reason.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

The Iranians themselves said these rockets were Iraqi.

But hey, this is the NY Lying Times.

[Pharmboy]

You're most welcome, Harp.

But, I have been posting full articles from the NY Times since I came here in '98 and never heard that before. I thought it was just the LA Times and the Washington Post that we had to be careful about.

But, if that is indeed the case, I shall change my ways.

[M Kehoe]

T'is good to see the mullahs are nervous. What, with 200,000 U.S. soldiers, airmen and marines coupled with 4 carrier battle groups, plus their own restless population, I'm sure the mullahs want to talk.

Plus, I'm sure Assad and the Syrian Ba'athist are wondering where the 4th ID is going to show up. Maybe on Damascus' door step? There is a new big dog in the yard, and he doesn't like jihadis.

5.56mm

[E Rocc]

And, if I were in charge, I would open those Shiite holy sites to Iranians ASAP.

Instantly repatriate any remaining Iranian POWs as well, without conditions. Iran has talked a good game to appease their fanatics, but they didnt let the Sadamites take refuge this time and did help clear the Gulf of Iraqi suicide boats.

-Eric

[Pharmboy]

A ruling please on the issue of NY Times' postings?

Thanks,
PB

[E Rocc]

Plus, I'm sure Assad and the Syrian Ba'athist are wondering where the 4th ID is going to show up. Maybe on Damascus' door step? There is a new big dog in the yard, and he doesn't like jihadis.

Ba'athists aren't jihadis, they are totalitarian socialists who embrace Islam when it suits them.

-Eric

[cynicom]

Give their government three days to leave town. The US owes Iran big time for the humiliation that was allowed by that hand wringing, sniveling Carter.

[SwinneySwitch]

On to Damascus!

[Cicero]

How many Iranians died in the Iran-Iraq war?

[homeagain balkansvet]

Many Iranians remember a C.I.A.-led coup half a century ago that overthrew the government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and reinstated the monarchy.>>

And of course nobody in America remembers... what was that again? Something about an embassy?

[dighton]

A ruling please on the issue of NY Times' postings?

NY Times articles can be posted full-length.

Related Publications in the LAT/WP vs FreeRepublic Settlement Agreement

[jimtorr]

No, as much as we here on FR deride the NY Slimes, they were not a party to the lawsuit by the LA Times and Wash Posties. There is no problem posting from the NYT.

[dighton]

Footnote: I'm nobody official around here, so #15 isn't a "ruling" as such.

[harpseal]

I got a freepmail from the admin moderator the NY Times er Slimes was not included in the Washington Post LA Times settlement. Please accept my apologies for doubting you.

[George W. Bush]

Let the British envoy do his work. He's stopping first in Syria but will then move on to his real purpose: Iran.

It is this aftermath in the region where we need Blair the most. Team Bush believes Blair can be the key player with Iran to achieve a bloodless coup and rid Iran of the mullahs once and for all.

I like the mention of the Kurds in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey. We've played the Kurd card very expertly throughout this episode. I think we'll keep playing that trump card in coming months. If we invaded Syria, the Kurd threat would be even more overwhelming to Turkey and Iran.

[Pharmboy]

Hey--I was the one you called out on this...where's MY apology? (No problem--just funnin' with ya; it's cool).