Sunni Shia relations 041107

Self-serving ‘experts’ fear Iran-Arab entente

By Tanvir Ahmad Khan

There is a sense of déjà vu about the current battle of ideas being fought in the media in a wide swathe of Muslim states from Egypt to Pakistan. Focused on Iran, it echoes a similar clash on the eve of the invasion of Iraq. Without indulging in unnecessary reductionism, one discerns two broad trends as the extra-regional threats to Iran multiply.

On the one side, there are concerned voices drawing lessons from the harrowing destruction of Iraq and the destabilizing impact of the invasion on the entire region. Containing and reversing the consequences of a virtual unraveling of one of the largest states of the Middle East will take years.

The danger of yet another upheaval in the Persian Gulf engages most of the regional statesmen and opinion-makers. Invariably they counsel restraint and a dialogue in which the United States should participate directly. Such a comprehensive dialogue finds universal support in Pakistan.

Predictably, pleas of moderation fill another highly vocal lobby in our region with great insecurity. In Iraq’s case, every initiative for a negotiated solution of the crisis was bitterly opposed as appeasement by this vociferous lobby comprising Iraqi exiles, some émigré Arab intellectuals who have a virtual “embedded” status with the U.S. war party, and a handful of hyperactive Iranians dreaming of an imperial restoration in their country.

Posing as regional experts, they work overtime to demonize Iran. Their daily intervention in the regional discourse exhibits a paranoia that the United States may, at the end of the day, refrain from ...

Ironically, while the best of detached Western analysts urge Iran and the Arab states, particularly the GCC, to work for a new entente, these experts strive hard to create a wall of distrust between them.

Their intentions are fairly transparent. Peace will put them out of business. So they prey on the legitimate apprehensions of nuclear proliferation in an area already threatened by an Israeli monopoly of nuclear weapons. Twenty-seven years down the line, their litany of the dangers of the export of Iranian Islamic revolution is utterly anachronistic but that does not stop them from raising this specter.

One of their favorite themes is the perils of engaging with Iran. So they attack American statesmen and analysts who dare suggest it. If Iran launches moves to de-escalate the current tension, they warn the world to be wary of “the Iranian Jekyll-and-Hyde threat”.

They will not face up to the fact that the only nuclear threat to the Middle East at present is not from non-existent Iranian nukes but, if at all, from the so-called usable nuclear weapons pioneered by Washington and possibly available also to Tel Aviv.

Viewed from Islamabad, these poisoned polemics betray a visceral fear of an Arab-Iranian rapprochement or even of a better Iranian-Pakistani understanding. The assumption that we cannot read the real motives and tactics of the neo-orientalists of our times, whose intellectual ancestors worked, in a bygone era of an imperial carve up of the Ottoman empire, to divide Turks, Kurds, and Arabs is an insult to our intelligence and intellect. Their new project is to engulf the same region in a Shiite-Sunni civil war.

Recent history points to only two rather brief periods of a plausible Iranian threat. A windfall of petro-dollars and the hubris of being christened the regional influential by the American strategic planners did fire the Pehlavi ambition to dominate the region. Some of its territorial issues are a legacy of that short-lived imperial thrust in the Iranian policy.

Second, the messianic fervor of the early years of the Islamic revolution of Iran did produce intemperate statements that caused concern in neighboring countries. But every student of such great revolutions knows that their white heat gives way to a Thermidor, and a reassertion of normal inter-state relations. By now, the Iranian revolution is an accepted part of the rich and varied tapestry of a global religion known for its historical diversity.

The rest belongs to statecraft. The Iran-Iraq war and Saddam Hussain’s invasion of Kuwait are better understood now and the region has the wisdom required to build a durable architecture of peace and cooperation. Iran needs this architecture no less urgently than its Arab and non-Arab neighbors.

In a state of siege, it has been trying to enhance its defensive capability but its acquisition of modern weapon systems Russian attack aircraft, medium range missiles and naval craft is still modest by regional standards. Nevertheless, it should not fight shy of a deep security dialogue in the region which should particularly address the nuclear concerns.

In return, Iran’s neighbors should offer Iran the security that comes from mutual acceptance of respective political systems, respect for different international alignments answering national needs and above all, a large enough matrix of economic cooperation.

Iran is a normal nation state, not an extra-terrestrial entity painted by the “lobby” that floods our media every day with nameless fears, panic and distortions.

Source: Teheran Times

US warns Iran and Syria

By Duraid Al Baik, Foreign Editor

November 02, 2007, 23:40

Dubai: The US Ambassador to Iraq yesterday warned both Iran and Syria for not doing enough to stop movement of terrorists into Iraq, but affirmed that the security in the country was much better than a few months ago.

Ryan Crocker, the US envoy in Baghdad since March 29 said the situation in Iraq is improving. "There were dramatic changes in the last couple of months in Anbar. We have seen those changes move from west to east through Abu Graib into Baghdad," he said.

Crocker, who is currently on a visit to the UAE, said: "We have literally seen tens of thousands of young men, who previously may have been involved in anti-coalition and anti-Iraqi government insurgencies, step forward and say we want to fight with you not against you.

"We have also seen the Iraqi government responding to that view. As many as 25,000 young men in Anbar province today are wearing the uniform of the Iraqi police and drawing salaries from the central government and preserving order in Anbar. The differences are there," Crocker said.

Regarding Iran's nuclear issue, he said there are no mysteries on what Iran needs to do to turn the crisis into an opportunity for Iran, for the region and for the international community.

"[US] Secretary [of State] [Condolezza] Rice and other international leaders made it clear in 2006 by which we laid down the terms for Iran to move ahead in cooperation with the international community and to meet its energy needs as well as other thing rather than confrontation.

"That offer is still on the table, but Iran needs to move away from the very dangerous course it is on right now.

"We are seeking a diplomatic and political solution for this crisis. We are not looking for military confrontation. We have been twice to the Security Council for Chapter 7 resolution and we will go again if necessary. But at the same time this is an evolving situation we are not going to take any option off the table," he said.

Addressing the issue of US diplomats' opposition to postings in Iraq, Crocker said couple of thousands of US diplomats had gone to Iraq since 2003.

"They performed with real courage and distinction. ... I don't see anything extraordinary about this. We are committed to support and defend the constitution of the United States and this doesn't mean we choose which fight we should be into," he said.

Regarding the meeting of Iraqi neighbours scheduled to be convened in Istanbul today, Crocker said the US hopes all the neighbours that are going to be represented in the meeting will live up to commitments that created the neighbour mechanism in the first place, which is to support the government of Iraq, to find ways to strengthen the Iraqi efforts to improve security, stability and to provide services for the Iraqi people and to coordinate in a positive way these kind of efforts.

"Most of Iraqi's neighbours are doing just that. Iran is unfortunately playing a distinctly negative role. We would like to see that change and again events such as this conference are a way of putting pressure on countries like Iran to make their actions match their policies."

Big gap

He said there is a big gap in what Iran says it wants for Iraq and what they are doing on the ground to undermine the efforts of the Iraqi government. With Syria, he said we would like to see Syria do more particularly with respect to the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq. "It is still a problem."

"We and the Iraqis have seen some decline in the numbers but ... it is important for Syria to do more .... These suicide bombers and fighters are clearly a danger to Iraq but they are also a danger to every state in the region, including Syria. So we like to see some unified, coordinated act to bring this transit to a halt," he said.

Crocker said his talks with Arab officials focused on finding ways to open Arab embassies in Baghdad with ambassadorial level representation.

"Certainly there are risks in Baghdad, but embassies can be secured and it is important to be there. It is important for the Arab states to be present in a positive way and reinforce Iraq's own sense of deep attachment to the Arab world," he said.

Source: Gulf News