Iran: Talks and Legitimacy - Takeyh and Marandi on CNN

The Latest from Iran (6 October): Loud Noises, Quiet Manoeuvres

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

On Sunday, CNN's Christiane Amanpour followed up her interview with chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili with a discussion with Dr Seyed Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran and Dr Ray Takeyh, formerly of the US State Department and now with the Council on Foreign Relations.

There is little here in the way of new analysis on the nuclear talks: Marandi is now CNN's "go-to" academic for a view supporting the Iranian Government, and Takeyh will be generally supportive of an Obama strategy of engagement.

The key paragraph instead is on Iran's internal situation. Note how Marandi links Iran's sovereignty to the question of Ahmadinejad's legitimacy, citing two very suspect opinion polls to put his central point. Accept the President and life will be a lot easier:

Iran is quite stable, and unlike what one often hears in the western media, I don't think that the country is in any serious problem.

I think that it's important for the American government to recognize that and to deal with the reality on the ground in Iran. If you'll recall, Terror Free Tomorrow, they had a poll before the elections that showed that Mr. Ahmadinejad was well ahead. And then the more recent University of Maryland poll also showed that he won the elections, or he was far more popular than Mr. Mousavi.

This doesn't go down well in the United States, I know. But I think that the United States, in order to be able to move towards rapprochement, and to be able to deal with Iran, they have to finally come to understand that Iran is not going to go away and the Islamic Republic of Iran is not going to collapse. If they do come to that recognition and they do come to respect the country, then I think that rapprochement would become much more easy, and I think that the Iranians are quite willing to move in that direction.

AMANPOUR: The Iranian government has invited hundreds of journalists, as well as six ambassadors from the so-called Non-Aligned Movement. There are no western countries represented here. Nonetheless, the Iranian government is saying that this is a transparency visit designed to show the world what it claims to be its peaceful nuclear program.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: That was early 2007, at another of Iran's nuclear facilities near the city of Esfahan. So, nearly three years later, will the Geneva talks between Iran and the U.S. lead to a new era of dialogue?

We turn to Mohammad Marandi, a professor at Tehran University, and to Ray Takeyh, a former adviser to the Obama administration on Iran.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Mr. Marandi, if I could go to you first, what is the mood in Iran around these talks? What are people hoping for?

MOHAMMAD MARANDI, PROFESSOR, TEHRAN UNIVERSITY: Well, I think people are mostly hoping that the United States and its allies will change their attitude towards the country. The tone, of course, did change a bit after Obama came to power, but there hasn't been any substantial change in the eyes of the Iranian people with regards to policy towards the country. And this is an appropriate time for the United States to make that change if they're really serious about dialogue, meaningful dialogue with Iran.

AMANPOUR: OK. Stand by for one second.

And Mr. Takeyh, what does the United States expect to get out of this meeting?

RAY TAKEYH, FMR. ADVISER TO OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ON IRAN: More focus on Iran's nuclear program, particularly the second site that has been -- the clandestine site that was revealed this week, having access to it and having it safeguarded by international inspectors; having Iran essentially accept confidence-building measures in this overall nuclear program; getting some of Iran's accumulated low-enriched uranium out of the country for reprocessing; and establishing a mechanism whereby the dialogue between the two countries can be more systematic, as opposed to episodic that it's been in the past.

AMANPOUR: So, therefore, it should be good news after today, because there has at least, according to all sides, been a development on the inspectors, the IAEA inspectors going, they say.

TAKEYH: Right. That's going to be worked out. And to be fair, the inspectors were going to go in there. After Iran itself declared this facility to the IAEA, it did so with a purpose of actually inviting them to inspect the facilities. So, that might have been the easier part. Getting the overall Iranian nuclear program into some degree of regulation and restraint, that might be tougher.

AMANPOUR: Mr. Marandi, in Tehran, do you think and do you believe the government wants broader relations or a different relationship with the United States beyond just these specific talks?

MARANDI: Yes. I think that if the Iranians feel that the Americans are truly serious, then there is indeed a possibility for rapprochement.

Both countries have serious issues in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as in Pakistan, that need to be resolved. And in some ways, they do have similar interests.

The problem is that the Iranians, in the past, on a number of occasions, did step forward for rapprochement, and the Americans gave a very negative response. For example, in the past, during the Clinton years, the Iranians allowed Conoco to come and develop oilfields in Iran, and then sanctions were imposed on Iran. And then, when Iran helped in Afghanistan, it was called a part of the access of evil.

So, this time around, I think the Iranians are going to wait to see what the Americans will be doing. They will probably not take the first step forward themselves.

AMANPOUR: Mr. Takeyh, in terms of what Mr. Marandi just raced, the issue of sanctions, what can the United States or should the United States do, or the international community, in terms of how to go forward? Incentives, would there be? And if they impose sanctions, if they chose to, do you think that would make any bit of difference?

TAKEYH: Well, I think for the next couple of months, everyone is going to wait to see how these negotiations evolve, and if you're going to make some sort of a progress, I think, by January. At that time, I think there are going to be serious discussions about a multilateral sanctions regime that may encompass China and Russia, particularly because at that time, you'd be making an assessment about how these talks work, whether Iran is genuine about coming to terms with the international community, with using these talks to stall and delay. That's when the sanctions issue is going to be revisited.

AMANPOUR: But Iran has said clearly that it hasn't worked in the past, it doesn't bow to those kinds of threats.

Another thing that the president of Iran has said -- he was quoted before these talks -- is that it was a way for them to gauge whether they would be treated with respect at these talks, whether there would be a different atmosphere in terms of interpersonal atmosphere across the table as a way forward.

Do you think that the atmospherics were also important today?

TAKEYH: Atmospherics is always important when you're talking about Iran, because as a country, (INAUDIBLE) international respectability, even though its conduct doesn't always merit it. But these particular sessions seem to have been conducted in a civil, respectful tone by both parties.

There was a sidebar discussion between an American representative and an Iranian representative. I don't know what transpired there, but, essentially, there seemed to have been a better atmosphere than perhaps in the previous talks, and certainly in reference to the rhetoric coming out of both capitals during the past week.

AMANPOUR: Mr. Marandi, given the political dilemma in Iran today and the continued protests, the continued issues there, what is actually going on in terms of various different factions in Iran today?

MARANDI: Well, one interesting thing is that, with regards to the nuclear program, MPs from all the different factions and political parties in parliament, both the different reformists, as well as the different principalists or conservative factions, they all signed a joint statement supporting Iran's position in the negotiations, which is quite significant. But I think it's also important to note that Iran is quite stable, and unlike what one often hears in the western media, I don't think that the country is in any serious problem.

I think that it's important for the American government to recognize that and to deal with the reality on the ground in Iran. If you'll recall, Terror Free Tomorrow, they had a poll before the elections that showed that Mr. Ahmadinejad was well ahead. And then the more recent University of Maryland poll also showed that he won the elections, or he was far more popular than Mr. Mousavi.

This doesn't go down well in the United States, I know. But I think that the United States, in order to be able to move towards rapprochement, and to be able to deal with Iran, they have to finally come to understand that Iran is not going to go away and the Islamic Republic of Iran is not going to collapse. If they do come to that recognition and they do come to respect the country, then I think that rapprochement would become much more easy, and I think that the Iranians are quite willing to move in that direction.

AMANPOUR: Well, let me put that to Mr. Takeyh.

You were in the State Department, you were on the sort of Iran file. You're no longer there.

What is the possibility of rapprochement beyond just this issue?

TAKEYH: Well, it reflects Iran's conduct on a broad ranges of issues -- its entanglements in terrorism, and obviously the nuclear file being probably the most important issue. But it's contingent on Iran's behavior...

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: When President Obama came in, he came in with a different language towards Iran.

TAKEYH: That's right.

AMANPOUR: Does that still hold? Does he still want to have reset relations?

TAKEYH: I think so. I think that throughout the discussions that have taken place during the past week regarding some of Iran's conduct, the president and others have always insisted that the diplomatic path is still open and Iran has a possibility of walking through the door if it chooses to. But the door is not going to stay open forever.

AMANPOUR: Does the United States agree with several proposals such as that Iran does not ever react well under threat, that Iran wants to be treated as the power of the region, which it is, by all accounts, a major power in the region?

TAKEYH: I think there's a recognition that Iran is a major power in the region and can exercise its influence. But it's important for that influence to be exercised in a constructive manner.

The Latest from Iran (5 October): The Difficulty of Signals

UPDATED Iran: Rafsanjani Makes A Public Move with “Friendship Principles”
Video: Sharif Uni Protest Against Javad Larijani (4 October)
The Latest from Iran (4 October): Waiting for Developments

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

2030 GMT. Harrumph, harrumph. The Financial Times, which is vying with The Times of London to be the at-hand Government channel for "news", uses several hundred words as a backdrop for this fist-shaking from "a senior British government official":

It is important that IAEA inspectors are given access to Qom immediately. We regret that Iran is delaying this until October 25. We see no reason for a delay. What possible reason can there be for it?

Given that the IAEA and even most of the Obama Administration welcomed the agreement, one has to wonder whether this is the same "rogue" British official who gave the FT their recent non-story on "secret Iran nuclear arms plan", whether this is a concerted London effort to play "tough cop" alongside a more conciliatory US, or whether Gordon Brown's Government has decided it really doesn't want meaningful negotiations.

1945 GMT: We're not asleep. It's just a very slow night for news, and we're also suffering from a bit of fatigue after a heavy academic day.

However, I think you can look forward to some new analysis on Hashemi Rafsanjani by the morning. And we're trying valiantly to track down the video of last night's interview on CNN by Christiane Amanpour of Ray Takeyh, formerly of the National Security Council, and Seyed Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran.  (Coincidentally, I've worked with both on academic projects.)

1540 GMT: An EA correspondent hauls me up for being too quick (and optimistic) about the Green movement's web presence. Mir Hossein Mousavi's Kalemeh website has only returned (0510 GMT) in the sense that the original site, www.kalemeh.ir, redirects to a backup, www.kaleme.com, which has not updated since Qods Day.

1500 GMT: Tehran's Prosecutor General has denied the news, reported yesterday, that 20 prominent detainees are soon to be released. He asserted that the cases of the deatinees, including former Vice President Mohammad Ali Abtahi, reformist leaders Abdollah Momeni, Shahab Tabatabaei, and Saeed Shariati, and journalist Mohammad Atrianfar, would be handled within "the process of law".

1400 GMT: More Atomic Tourism. A helpful reader adds to our item (0620 GMT) on the Come Visit Us website for Fordo, the home of Iran's second enrichment facility: "You can also visit an observatory built 3 years ago. Location, location , location."

1350 GMT: Another Loosening of the Net? Following the report that Mousavi website Kalemeh could soon be back on-line (0510 GMT), the Etemade Melli newspaper, linked to Mehdi Karroubi, has been acquitted by a majority jury vote of complaints over its stories. This could pave the way for a resumption of the paper's publication, which was halted this summer.

1320 GMT: Mousavi Welcomed Into the Fold? Khabar Online adds to Pedestrian's excellent piece (see 0600 GMT) on the speech of judiciary official Javad Larijani at Sharif University, which called for an end to animosity against Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi and welcomed Mousavi's "move inside the system".

1300 GMT: Academic Pressures. It's hard to put all together, but stories are piling up of punishment of university students and lecturers for political activity and even for challenges over academic matters. Students across Iran have been summoned to disciplinary offices, and Rooz Online writes of five law professors at Allameh Tabatabai University who have been barred from teaching.

1200 GMT: Still slow on the domestic front in Iran, so one more note on the media lemmings rushing after Sunday's New York Times mis-story on the Iran nuclear programme.

Unsurprisingly, The Times of London takes the prize for turning an already flawed report into a seven-alarm exaggeration: "Iran has the know-how to produce a nuclear bomb and may already have tested a detonation system small enough to fit into the warhead of a medium-range missile." The Times not only uses this as the pretext to reduce Sunday's press conference by IAEA head El Baradei to an afterthought but to give him a good kicking: "He will not be missed by foreign policy hawks in the US who accuse him of acquiescing in years of nuclear prevarication by Iran."

0935 GMT: All the Spin That's Fit to Print. This morning's New York Times on Iran did not repeat its Sunday spectacular of misinformation --- Iran Close to Bomb! --- going for the neutral (and factually correct) headline, "Iran Agrees to Allow Inspectors on Oct. 25".

But you can't get keep a good Government outlet down, so David Sanger (yep, him again) and Nazila Fathi, drop this into Paragraphs 5-6:

Some administration officials expressed private skepticism that Iran would ultimately prove willing to allow the kind of widespread inspections that the United States and its Western allies have in mind. They want the inspections to include several facilities that American and European officials suspect could be part of a string of covert facilities built to supply the newly revealed enrichment center near the holy city of Qum.

Sanger and Fathi fail to offer the corrective that no published US intelligence report puts forth evidence or even speculates that Iran has "a string of covert facilities". No leaked US report makes that claim. Not even the ISIS/IAEA report, which Sanger mangled on Sunday into an imminent warning that Iran had the information for The Bomb, alleges this.

I dread to think what's coming out tomorrow. Maybe it will be "Secret Government Installation for Mega-Giant Atomic Robots".

(P.S. No, it doesn't have to be this way. Simon Tisdall of The Guardian gets taken for a ride by the Sanger-Administration line, but The Associated Press, whose report runs in The Washington Post, gives the story a straightforward treatment with the El Baradei press conference and the public comments of President Obama's National Security Advisor, James Jones. They do not embellish --- and thus distort --- the story with the "on-background" spin of unnamed Administration and European officials.)

0800 GMT: Go Wide. Really Wide. Press TV, in its report on Sunday's press briefing by the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, offers an unsubtle signal of the Iran Government' strategy to move negotiations far beyond direct consideration of Tehran's nuclear programme to international and regional issues: "The UN nuclear watchdog Chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, says regional and global stability can only be achieved through total nuclear disarmament."

There is no reference at all in the story to the talks over Iran's uranium enrichment.

0620 GMT: Atomic Tourism. Fancy a different kind of vacation?

The Iranian village of Fordoo, the location of the second enrichment facility, has a website full of information for the wanna-be visitor. It has the latest news --- a reassurance from Press TV that no radioactive material has been moved into the no-longer-secret enrichment plant --- a biography of the village, and an inspirational quote: "The best way to predict the future is making it."

0600 GMT: Yesterday we posted the video of student protests at Sharif University of the speech by high-level Judiciary official Mohammad Javad Larijani. Pedestrian has a fascinating account of the occasion. It includes Larijani's attempts to "bond" with the kids, “I was once a student, I was once a part of your gang. I was part of the same chaos," before dropping the boom on the opposition movement:

I agree with [the] statement [of protesting students that "the coup d'etat government must resign"] very much. But that coup d’état was defeated and the leader of the coup d’état was [Mir Hossein] Mousavi.

There were individuals who were part of the system and participated in the election, but on June 12th, at 11p.m. they turned their backs on the system. Their actions constitute a coup d’état . They took a very harsh tone against the government, accused it of murder, theft, lying, etc. and they used the vocabulary of thugs.

Yet by far the most intriguing passage was Larijani's response to protesting pro-Ahmadinejad students, “We must free our hearts of hate towards Mousavi, [Mehdi] Karroubi.….Because with hate, we can not tell truth from lies.” He added that Mousavi had now "said that he plans to move inside the system and right the wrongs. I think this is a step in the right direction.”

0545 GMT: Another interesting but lower-profile move this weekend. Hossein Taeb, the commander of the Basiji commander, was named a Deputy Director at the Ministry of Intelligence. While some sharper-eyed Iran-watchers noted the development, they did not consider this: given the battle this summer between President Ahmadinejad and other politicians and clerics (including the Supreme Leader?) for control of the Ministry, with the firing of more than 20 high-level officials, who claims a victory with Taeb's appointment?

Meanwhile, Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Naqdi has been appointed as the new commander of the Basiji.

0510 GMT: The most intriguing development inside Iran yesterday was the statement by Hashemi Rafsanjani (see our analysis) setting out guidelines for political activity and also putting specific warnings, such as a "mysterious network" trying to undermine the Islamic Republic and the false or misleading information put out through various outlets.

Decoding Rafsanjani's elaborately framed words, the easy part is that he is telling the Iranian people: in these tense and confusing times, Trust Me. And the Supreme Leader. The one reliable source for the latest on political development are statements from the Expediency Council, which Rafsanjani heads. The one trustworthy politician, by unsubtle implication, is the former President.

But who is Rafsanjani putting off-limits with his reference to a mysterious network? Some might say the reformists, who have gone too far to unsettle the system that Rafsanjani says he will defend through a return to "unity". Others are arguing, persuasively, that the threat comes from elements within the regime, and they have support from the pointed clue about disinformation --- given that the first "National Unity Plan" came out through Fars News Agency, fed to it by person or persons unknown, the former President's most direct challengers probably hold high office somewhere inside the establishment.

Of course, Rafsanjani could be putting both sides on notice with his warnings, even as he elevates himself with his First Amongst Equals relationship with the Supreme Leader. That still leaves the biggest question, as we noted yesterday: what exactly is the plan that he favours?

Meanwhile, the Green movement has been boosted by the return of Kalemeh, the site of Mir Hossein Mousavi's campaign. It had been off-line for several days after the Government's crackdown on the  opposition before Qods Day.