Bush Aids the Cause of Regime Change in Iran
January 03, 2004
Telegraph
Opinion
Earthquakes have a way of shaking the political landscape as well as the Earth's crust. In 1999, Greek aid to the victims of the Istanbul tremor broke through the hostility felt by two neighbours for each other. Today, following the Bam disaster, the same could happen between the United States and Iran.
An American mission is already in the afflicted area, helping to set up a field hospital. It is now proposed that Senator Elizabeth Dole, former head of the Red Cross in America, should lead a humanitarian aid delegation to Iran that would include a member of George W Bush's family. Does it require an earthquake to overcome decades of mistrust between the "Great Satan" and part of the "axis of evil"?
First, we await Teheran's response to Washington's suggestion. Hardline clerical voices at Friday prayers left their congregations in no doubt that an offer of aid could not hope to absolve America from its sins. Yet most Iranians would welcome closer ties with the West as part of a general move towards political liberalisation.
Iran's leaders have to weigh their natural distaste for the sole remaining superpower with public eagerness to use the earthquake as a means of détente. Apathy at street level about the shortcomings of the Iranian regime could ignite into demonstrations if the clerics mishandle the situation.
Before Mrs Dole volunteered to lead a mission to Iran, Mr Bush had asked whether more could be done to help the stricken country.
In Europe, which has chosen a policy of constructive engagement with Teheran, the latest American offer will be seen as a welcome retreat from "axis of evil" demonisation.
In an election year in which he wants to avoid foreign policy crises, Mr Bush, it will be argued, is seeking to distance himself from neo-conservative demands that the mullahs be overthrown.
But is it as simple as that? The President has reiterated his call to Iran's leaders to allow greater political freedom. Cease aid to Islamic terrorists and abandon nuclear ambitions. Temporarily easing the economic embargo against Teheran for humanitarian reasons does not amount to a fundamental change of policy.
The suppression of anti-government demonstrations in Iran, further suicide bombings in Israel or a confrontation over inspections between Teheran and the International Atomic Energy Agency could all undermine incipient rapprochement.
Indeed, there is a case for saying that, in approving Mrs Dole's mission, the President is attempting to appeal over the heads of the mullahs directly to the people. That is the sort of insidious manoeuvre of which the neo-conservatives would heartily approve.
Proffering the olive branch of aid is consonant with a desire to contain friction in the Middle East during an election year. But for Teheran to meet the Administration's basic foreign policy goals would require a change of regime. In that sense, Mr Bush's eirenic gesture can be said to have set the satanic cat among the clerical pigeons.
http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/01/03/dl0301.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/01/03/ixoplead.html"..in approving Mrs Dole's mission, the President is attempting to appeal over the heads of the mullahs directly to the people. "
And the people are getting very angry at the regime...........