About Iran and the US: a view from India

India's newspapers are yet to shrink in size--unlike America's papers that have reduced width, fewer pages, and significantly lesser readership. Thus, they are able to have lengthy opinion pieces even in the weekday editions.

Today's Hindu has one mighty long piece on Iran, and it certainly has a strong viewpoint that might surprise the typical American reader: the author, a former diplomat, opines that the Grand Ayatollah and Ahmedinajad have come out stronger, and that the UK, the US, and Obama, are now in a much weakened position with respect to Iran. Here is an excerpt:

Paradoxically, the Obama administration will now deal with a Khamenei who is at the peak of his political power. As for President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, he will now be negotiating from a position of strength. Arguably, it helps when your adversary is strong so that he can take tough decisions, but in this case the analogy may not hold.

Also, the regional milieu can only work to Iran’s advantage. Turkey distanced itself from the European opinion. Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan greeted Mr. Ahmedinejad’s victory. Moscow followed suit. Beijing has never before expressed such staunch solidarity with the Iranian regime. Neither Syria nor Hezbollah and Hamas showed any inclination to disengage from Iran. True, Syria’s ties with Saudi Arabia improved in the last six months and Damascus welcomes the Obama administration’s recent overtures. But far from adopting the Saudi or U.S. agenda toward Tehran, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem openly criticised the legitimacy of the street protests in Tehran.

He warned last Sunday when the Tehran streets were witnessing unrest: “Anyone betting on the fall of the Iranian regime will be a loser. The [1979] Islamic revolution is a reality, deeply-rooted in Iran, and the international community [read U.S.] must live with that.” Mr. Moallem called for the “establishment of a dialogue between Iran and the United States based on mutual respect and non-interference in Iran’s affairs.” ....

All things taken into account, therefore, there has been a goof-up of major proportions in Washington. The Obama magic suddenly wore off when he sounded like George W. Bush in disregarding convention and courtesy, contrary to the abundant promise in the Cairo speech. It is inconceivable that the Obama administration harboured the notion that the commotion in Tehran’s middle-class districts would weaken the Iranian regime or make it diffident and dilute its resolve while the critical negotiations on the nuclear and other issues regarding the situation around Iran commenced.

Mr. Ahmedinejad left hardly anything to interpretation when he stated in Tehran on Saturday: “Without doubt, Iran’s new government will have a more decisive and firmer approach towards the West. This time the Iranian nation’s reply will be harsh and more decisive” and will aim at making the West regret its “meddlesome stance.”