20 - 26 December 2001
Issue No.565
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 20 - 26 December 2001 Issue No.565 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Marking Iran?
The Islamic Republic of Iran stopped sponsoring international terrorism years ago. Azadeh Moaveni explores why the reputation has stuck
When the American administration of President George W Bush is not busy deciding whether or not to go after Iraq as part of its war on terrorism, it is agonising over how to deal with that country's eastern neighbour, Iran. Doubtless there are more than a few Washington hawks nostalgic for the 1980s, when Iran and Iraq were too busy, engaged in bloody warfare, to pose a concern for the United States. While it appears that the hawkish officials who support removing Saddam Hussein from power are gaining the upper hand, the jury is still out on Iran. In just the last two weeks, the New York Times op-ed page has reflected the still open debate: "Iran could be a valuable friend," ran a headline this week while, two weeks ago, a columnist reflected that an "Enemy of my enemy can be my enemy too."
Iranian President Mohamed Khatami prays at the Imam Khamenei mosque on Eid Al-Fitr (photo: AP)
When Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently stated that "you're going to see new relationships coming out all across the globe," the anti-Iran lobby in Washington went into crisis mode. A series of stories published in defence weeklies and obscure publications began alleging that Iran had been sustaining terror links from the time of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, that triggered World War I, up until this year's September 11 attacks. Despite the obvious religious and political differences that make ties between Iran and Al-Qa'eda an impossibility, a complex web of associations, involving old-time operatives like Emad Mughniyeh, has been traced to help finger Iran for ongoing links to terrorist groups in general, and Al- Qa'eda in particular. American Republicans accuse Tehran of a good-cop-bad-cop routine, whereby Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei directs an international campaign of terror, while President Mohamed Khatami distracts the world by launching a dialogue between civilisations.
The hawks in Washington would have had a case as early as five years ago. It is true, and widely known, that throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Islamic regime did engage in the murder of its opposition abroad. And, in 1996, Washington accused Iran of being behind the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 American servicemen. The US indictment in the case stopped short of alleging Iran's direct involvement in the bombing itself, and mentioned no Iranians by name. However, it argued that "elements of the Iranian government inspired, supported, and supervised members of Saudi Hizbullah." Iran has always denied these allegations, while at the same time being intriguingly grateful to Saudi Arabia for its foot- dragging in the investigation.
But today, the current reality in Iran is far less sinister. The start of the Khatami era marked Iran's abandonment of state-directed terrorism. The ousting of the Intelligence Minister due to his links to incidents such as Khobar, as well as terrorist acts against Iran's opposition abroad, began a process of restructuring key government ministries and purging them of shadowy cells with worrisome agendas. Khatami was making it clear that he would not head an Iran that leaves its dirty fingerprints around the globe. And, in the past two years, even the regime's most violent attacks on domestic activists have stopped.
The United States may still fault Tehran for its support of Palestinian and Lebanese militant groups. But whether these groups are defined as terrorists, or as resistance fighters, remains an outstanding question that the US will need to work out within the framework of a concerted policy that will involve its Arab allies. Iran, on that basis alone, cannot be held accountable for international terror.
The question of resistance groups aside, the US has historically, throughout successive administrations, been uncertain of how to deal with Iran's role in anti-American activities. Washington retaliated against Afghanistan and Sudan for their alleged links to specific terrorist acts with far less evidence of their involvement than it had in linking Iran to the Khobar bombing. And the handling of the Khobar Towers case embodied Washington's unwillingness to confront Tehran's alleged state-sponsored terrorism directly. At the time, Washington chose the least confrontational option: concurrent with his administration's efforts to reach out to Iran, President Bill Clinton sent a secret letter to President Mohamed Khatami, requesting assistance in resolving the Khobar case. He received no reply, and the story ended there.
Whether the evolving political reality on the ground in Tehran will rehabilitate Iran in the eyes of Washington is not yet clear. Support for Palestinian groups complicates matters, but this concern has not stopped Washington from building closer ties with other regional states, Qatar most recently. If the US intends to make its political ties with regional countries contingent on the forced observance of its own definition of terror, then a slew of geopolitical relationships will be wrecked. Why Iran is reserved a special place in the hierarchy of terrorism remains an outstanding question, especially when a close examination of the past five years show how far the Islamic Republic has come in maturing and abandoning the activities that once earned it notoriety.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page