Hello class.
The title of this post comes from the Iranian reaction to President-elect Barack Hussein Obama's victory.
Read this TIME.com article regarding the new possibilities for Iran-US relations. Do you think the optimism is warranted? Is this a good thing for either country? What are your other reactions?
I am excited to hear your thoughts.
-Amir
28 comments:
America should take the opportunity to engage diplomatically with the world, including our enemies, with a leader who they may trust. The AP reported that Arabs across the Middle East were strongly interested with Obama's Muslim family origins. Iranians are not Arabs but I would assume they see something similar. In regards to Iranian surprise over his victory, my grandmother believes that the CIA must be behind this. As we learned, in the 20th century Iran that my grandmother hails from, the one in power in Iran and how much power he had was controlled by the CIA.
Make no mistake. President-elect Obama has made it clear that a nuclear Iran would be unacceptable, and he would not take any option off the table to stop it from happening. He is firmly opposed to Iran's influence and support of radical terrorist groups in Middle East.
Relations between the U.S. and Iran were strained by Iran in 1979, not the U.S. It's Iran that changed, not the U.S. Even with an Obama administration, it is up to Iran make the "change" if it sincerely wants peace with the U.S. and the Western world.
In my opinion, this is a great window of opportunity both nations to normalize relations. There is a lot at stake for both countries and it essential that the President Obama take this opportunity to make an overture to Iran.
It is obvious that Iran is in favor of talks and negotiations evinced by the latest letter from Ahmadinejad congratulating Barack Obama on his victory. This is historical as it marks the first time an Iranian president has done such thing since the inception of the Islamic Republic.
Ahmadinejad is facing immense pressure internally not only from the people and the reformist camp but also from some of the hard liners. This is a golden opportunity for him to amend the hostility that exists between the two nations as he is up for re-election in June.
However, there are several issues that pose a great challenge to the prospect of peace. Iran's support of terrorist organization namely Hamas and Hezbollah remain an obstacle that has complicated and detoriated relations between the countries since the hostage crisis in November of 1979.
Iran's nuclear issue is obviously the centerpiece of any possible negotiations. However, in my opinion the notion of state sponsored of terrorism complicates this issue further, and makes it very difficult to use grit and coercive diplomacy to work.
It seems that the two countries also need to engage in multilateral talks involving Syria and Lebanon on security issues and build a framework on possible concessions between Israel and Syria and Hezbollah. By reaching some form of agreement involving Hezbollah, Hamas will be pressured to become more pragmatic. In my opinion, by establishing a Palestinian state, there could be a de-facto agreement between Iran and Israel although the rhetoric from inside Iran will remain belligerent due to domestic issues.
President Obama will engage in talks with Iran and Syria and in my opinion the prospects of peace has never be this promising in the past 30 years.
opinion, this is a great window of opportunity both nations to normalize relations. There is a lot at stake for both countries and it essential that the President Obama take this opportunity to make an overture to Iran.
It is obvious that Iran is in favor of talks and negotiations evinced by the latest letter from Ahmadinejad congratulating Barack Obama on his victory. This is historical as it marks the first time an Iranian president has done such thing since the inception of the Islamic Republic.
Ahmadinejad is facing immense pressure internally not only from the people and the reformist camp but also from some of the hard liners. This is a golden opportunity for him to amend the hostility that exists between the two nations as he is up for re-election in June.
However, there are several issues that pose a great challenge to the prospect of peace. Iran's support of terrorist organization namely Hamas and Hezbollah remains an obstacle that has complicated and detoriated relations between the countries since the hostage crisis in November of 1979.
Iran's nuclear issue is obviously the centerpiece of any possible negotiations. However, in my opinion the notion of state sponsored of terrorism complicates this issue further, and makes it very difficult to use grit and coercive diplomacy to work.
It seems that the two countries also need to engage in multilateral talks involving Syria and Lebanon on security issues and build a framework on possible concessions between Israel and Syria and Hezbollah. By reaching some form of agreement involving Hezbollah, Hamas will be pressured to become more pragmatic. In my opinion, by establishing a Palestinian state, there could be a de-facto agreement between Iran and Israel although the rhetoric from inside Iran will remain belligerent due to domestic issues.
President Obama will engage in talks with Iran and Syria and in my opinion the prospects of peace has never be this promising in the past 30 years.
My first reaction is surprise that the people of Iran are so excited and support America's president so much. It seems strange and is not the kind of attention I would want for the United States.
Secondly, Barack promised the world that he would remove the troops from the Middle East within a couple of years but now that he has been debriefed and knows a little more about the security situation in Iraq many, as well as myself, are hoping that he changes his mind about wanting to remmve troops so quickly. If he removes the troops without them finishing the job they came in there to do Iraq will be a safe haven for the Alkhaita and Iran...bad news for US.
I think that Barack will end up breaking a lot of his promises because he will see that it is to the benefit and best interest of the U.S. to do so and I think that the Iranian people will be disappointed with his decisions and all the excitement and euphoria or Barack's election will die down.
I'm heartened by the response of Iranians to the outcome of the election. I do believe that President-elect Obamas historic win presents a rare opportunity for change in American foreign policy. World reaction to his election brings hope for better relations between the U.S. and countries throughout the world.
That being said, I do not believe the Iranian people will see an immediate change in U.S. foreign policy. Yesterday, Iran announced that it had successfully launched another round of ballistic missiles. The Iranian regime is no doubt testing the new American administration. In addition, Israel is preparing for elections that could install a confrontational leader; Benjamin Netanyahu into the Prime Ministership. A confrontational Israel will force the hand of a then President Obama to support them. Also, Iranian attempts at developing a nuclear bomb cannot be overlooked by the Administration.
The best thing President Obama can do in order to clear the path for a brighter tomorrow is leverage his popularity amongst Israelis and Iranians by quietly indicating who he'd like to work with. If Israel sees a moderate elected in Iran or if Iran sees a less confrontational leader elected in Israel (I'm not sure which country has elections first) the populations within the two countries may respond in-kind. One thing that everyone should agree on, whether it be the Supreme Leader or the next U.S. Secretary of State (Hillary Clinton anyone?) is that President Ahmadinejad must stay quiet.
I believe Obama will set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq and will approach neighbors within the region to ensure continued Iraqi stability. This will guarantee Iran a role within Iraq and just may open the channels for discussion. One thing Iranians must remember, much like Americans, is that problems will not be solved overnight and that the new President will be far more concerned with repairing the U.S. economy during his first years in office. The Iranian issue, while important, will not be the central concern.
it will be interesting to see how things pan out. i read some articles that claimed the iranian government is actually scared of no-precondition negotiations. with america taking a more open and less threatening role in it's approach to iran, the iranian government won't be able to play its victim card in the international community as much. domestically speaking too, the iranian government also leverages fear and hatred toward the US to legitimize itself. with less reason to hate the US maybe we will see some renewed energy in iran's domestic opposition to their hardline government.
While the world as a whole is very optimistic regarding Obama's win (or so the news channels seem to portray), how Obama's foreign policy will really work is somewhat of a mystery. On the one hand, his campaign for change automatically believe his policies will reflect nonaggression, but on the other hand, he does not indicate that he will quickly pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan, and he has not really indicated his stance on the issue of Iran further than he will work diplomatically.
As people have said in the article, Obama may not be so forgiving to Iranian policies and his American policies may be more aggressive than people expect. Since Iranian leaders have long used anti-American rhetoric to distract the population from issues at home, it seems that they may scrutinize the Obama Administration possibly moreso than past administration to lower his popularity among Iranian citizens. Hopefully this will not be the case.
The election of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States marks a change in relations between the US and Iran. Based on the article in Time Magazine, it appears that for the inhabitants of North Tehran, Obama's election warrants optimism. As state below, President-elect Obama's campaign, which promoted change on a widescale level, does not guarantee the implemtation of non-aggression policies in the Middle East and Iran. Nevertheless, Iranians embrace Obama's election to office and look favorably upon him for his rhetoric ushers in an era of 'change' between the way in which Iranians and Americans interact. Furthermore, the very fact that President Ahmadinejad delivered a congratulations message to President-elect Obama is another sign of optimism. I view this widespread recognition of Obama as the next U.S. President as a shift in U.S.-Iranian relations. However, to be blunt, whether or not Obama carries out his rhetoric is something that Iranians and Americans, alike, anticipate.
Nahid Siamdoust's article was hopeful; the majority of opinions she included were optimistic, (aside from the quote from the 21-year-old chemistry student Saman Kavousi.) I think it is foolish and somewhat naive for Iranians and Iranian-Americans to assume that Obama will resolve U.S. relations with Iran. Although Obama is incredibly eloquent and articulate, he cannot simply grant the wishes that many Iranians hope for, such as the desire of Siamdoust's grocery storekeeper that he'll "..be the first to apply for a visa." Hopefully, U.S. and Iran's relations won't become worse but it is rash and hasty to think that they will radically improve.
Siamdoust traces the history of Obama's name and records: "Barack is a word of Semitic origin meaning "Blessing," and Obama, when written in Persian, transliterates into "He is with us." Hence, one could argue that Obama's name itself attracts Iranians and Iranian-Americans because it is name which relates to what theorist Mikhail Bakhtin describes as "one's linguistic and cultural identity." In other words, his name isn't not "alien" or "foreign" like "John" or "Jack." To take it one step further, psychoanalytic critics could perhaps argue that unconsciously, Iranians are drawn to Obama because they can identity their sense of "self" to his name which its meaning is akin to their own.
However, Siamdoust reports that it's not Obama's name that attracts most Iranians but "...it's the fact that they take the leader at his word and believe that he intends to end President Bush's policies of war and aggression." I think that Iranians are being naive and idealistic; most politicians say things which the majority of the masses one to hear. They bank on universals like "peace, jobs for all, etc." But does the ever happen in reality? Yes, to some extent, it sometimes does, but not all the time! I hope that Obama does improve U.S./Iran relations, but Iranians have to understand that this is not a one-man job, but rather, includes the support of other U.S. politicians as well.
I am surprised and amazed that Obama won, and also surprised and somewhat relieved that most Iranians were elated about his victory. I think that the optimism is certainly warranted (within reason), because this is an opportunity for U.S.-Iran relations to improve and possibly become somewhat peaceful and normal. But there are many more concerns and complications
to resolve. Iran's issues with terrorism and its nuclear threat issues will obviously hinder a timely withdrawal of our troops, and smooth diplomacy and negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. There is a huge mess to clean up as far as the war goes, and there will still be hard feelings on both sides (perhaps more so with Iran)and sacrifices made by Obama that will not make the Iranian people happy. I don't think it is possible for Obama to be able to appease and improve conditions for the Iranian people completely, because that is something he has yet to do for Americans. As we have seen in some of the documentaries in class, every political leader and his/her actions have flaws and limitations that directly affect the people. However, I most certainly think that his victory has created justified and much needed optimism in Iran (and the U.S.) for relations between our countries. How it will play out? I have no idea, and I am uncertain. The responses from Iranian citizens in the article were certainly more optimistic and knowledgeable than my response. I personally have yet to trust my own government, let alone what will happen in the Middle East. I truly hope that the Iranian people will understand that things cannot be fixed completely, and that Obama being president does not guarantee a resolution to this mess. I'm sure they're aware of this fact, but the outcome will tell. I think his election is a good thing for Iran and U.S., because it vaguely creates a sense of peace and a bond, with Obama's Muslim background and much more importantly with his foreign policies that oppose Bush's policies.
I think one thing I have learned, being a citizen of the Unites States during the past eight years, is to not have very high expectations of what a candidate proposes to do, versus what that person will do once in office. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that Obama won the election - I think he will be a refreshing change for the country and for the world. However, when it comes to the messy Middle East foreign policies, I think that it's too hard to say what will actually happen now that Obama is in office. Regardless of what things he has said he would like to do, we won't really know until he takes the office and starts actually making the new policies.
I am still somewhat optimistic, however, that the relations between Iran and the United States do change for the better (by re-building relationships). But I've learned to not interpret Obama's propositions as promises. And most importantly, he people of Iran should keep this in mind as well.
The whole situation is rather interesting to me. Regarding the way things worked out of course. I find it interesting that while parts of Obama's name were met with uneasiness here in the US, they are embraced with open arms in middle eastern nations such as Iran.
Now obviously, it would be slightly stupid to like someone based solely off of their name. But it was his name which had raised attention and now the Iranian people are more or less acquainted with his poliicies and also embrace them with open arms.
After facing years of aggression and scrutiny by the Bush Administration, Iran, as well as the rest of the world is ready for a new strategy of international security. It is hoped that Obama will hopefully restore US-Iran relation, we just have to see how far the Iranian government is willing to go to do the same.
The whole situation is rather interesting to me. Regarding the way things worked out of course. I find it interesting that while parts of Obama's name were met with uneasiness here in the US, they are embraced with open arms in middle eastern nations such as Iran.
Now obviously, it would be slightly stupid to like someone based solely off of their name. But it was his name which had raised attention and now the Iranian people are more or less acquainted with his poliicies and also embrace them with open arms.
After facing years of aggression and scrutiny by the Bush Administration, Iran, as well as the rest of the world is ready for a new strategy of international security. It is hoped that Obama will hopefully restore US-Iran relation, we just have to see how far the Iranian government is willing to go to do the same.
I feel the recent attacks, back and forth, between American and Iranian leaders has created an atmosphere of anti-Iranian sentiment in the United States. And for this reason, I find interesting the very optimistic and hopeful comments several Iranians expressed throughout the article. The quotes illustrate, to me, many Iranians' desires to see an end to hostile US-Iranian relations.
I think their optimism is somewhat warranted, as Barack Obama has expressed numerous times his willingness to discuss and negotiate with Iranian leaders to achieve a peaceful solution to US-Iranian tension. Just as others have stated, however, Barack Obama is not going to surrender to all of Iranian leaders' desires. He is opposed to Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons and Iranian government support of terrorist organizations.
Ultimately, the election of Barack Obama provides an great opportunity for the facilitation of diplomatic discussions between the United State and Iran.
Although President Bush and President-Elect Obama have the same policies on Iran in terms of their views on Iran developing nuclear weapons and condemning them for supporting terrorist organizations, the difference between the two is that Obama is willing to talk with Iran. Iran wants to gain nuclear weapons for many reasons; one is to protect its self against attacks from foreign countries, specifically the U.S. Since Obama is willing to talk to Iran, they put an option on the table that the Bush Administration refused, negotiation. SO I do think this excitement among the Iranian public is warrant.
I also think that Obama will follow through with his word and stage talks with foreign powers. The Obama administration has already drafted letters requesting to meet with the President of North Korea.
The fact that the people of Iranian are so willing to support the new American President also says a lot about what they expect and want in the future. It also sends a message to the Iranian people that Americans elected a President with more peaceful policies towards the Middle East. With these two mentalities rising among the people, hopefully the leaders of both countries will take a queue from the people and make strides to more peaceful and stable relations between the two countries.
I do think that the optimism is warranted based on the fact that this is a total and complete step out of the box in terms of the newly elected president to be. Over three hundred years of white men as presidents in the US and now the US has elected something new in every sense of the word. Obama has proven to be more eloquent and has proposed new ideas not taken in Washington so far.
I do believe this is a good thing for both states in that a new face may change some of the formers policies. Most of the world rooting for Obama does not mean that he is the best president but during this time he has some sway to shift policy in the US and global perceptions.
I hope that all of this hype will allow him alot of time and patience from domestic and foreign peoples everywhere.
I think the optimism is warrented on both the sides of the United States and Iran. President Bush was very militaristic in his policies and Obama does not seem to uphold that characteristic as of yet. I'm just as optimistic as the Iranians featured in this article in that the United States, under Obama's presidency and leadership, will begin to engage with the rest of the world. However, it is important to remember that Obama is not in office yet and thus has not demonstrated that he intends to follow through with his campaign promises. Also, an important point is that there is so much optimism and hope in Obama to carry out change that it seems inevitable that some degree of dissappointment will follow. The Bush legacy is a pretty steep hill for Obama to cross, including the Iraq war, and therefore we can not expect him to reverse all of his policies in a heartbeat. Despite these facts, Obama, I think will more openly engage in world politics including relations with Iran in a way that is not solely determined by militaristic means as in the case with George W. Bush, which offers some promise for better relations between the countries but not a complete vanishing of strained relations.
Although it is heart-warming to hear the optimism of the Iranian people to the Obama victory, the statement made by Iran's former Vice President, Mohammad Ali Abtahi reminded that true change cannot come from Obama and the United States alone. Mohammad Ali Abtahi essentially claims that Iran's conservatives would have preferred a McCain victory, "because they benefit more from enmity with the U.S., which allows them to rally the Islamic world behind their policies and at the same time suppress dissent at home."
In another article that I found, a teacher named Seyyid Hossein, made a similar point: "Obama's victory could improve things because he has his head on his shoulders. But I believe the regime doesn't want better relations with the US. It wants to have a big enemy to frighten people and maintain its rule."
I, like many of the Iranian people, am cautiously optimistic about the Obama administration's policies toward Iran. Though I believe that Obama in his heart of hearts does not seek to extend similar Bush policies during his time in office, I believe that a lot of his rhetoric toward Iran has been changing from what he originally said. Though he still seeks to better relations between both countries, he is taking a more rigid stance toward Iran than before, seemingly to please moderates. I am saddened by this, but I nonetheless hope that Obama will do everything in his power to normalize relations between the two nations. I also hope that Khatami runs to replace Ahmadinejad because I believe that he would be more open to working with the United States to settle controversial issues--like Iran's nuclear program.
Reading this TIME piece by Niam Siamdoust gives me confidence that a majority of Iranians know that the possibility for change is immense. Both countries would benefit from rectified diplomatic relations, and the optimism is definitely warranted. A large majority of the country followed the election, knowing that an Obama victory could mean radical changes throughout the country, and Ahmadinejad himself, for the first time during the Islamic Republic's tenure, offered a congradulatory statement to Obama. Though not concrete acts of alliance, these are all baby steps in what could become a dominant relationship in the future.
Iran would once again be allowed back into the world economic market, drastically improving its impoverished and fading economy. More jobs would become created in Iran, drastically reducing the emmigration of the college educated. If Iran compromises on its nuclear program, it could gain alot in return, such as concessions in the form of trade and alliances, boosting its economy.
America would also benefit greatly from improved relations with Iran. It would have the largest Shia population in the Middle East as a sphere of influence throughout the entire region, acting as a stabilizing force and as a watchdog. This would help stabilize the now Shia government of Iraq so that the slow of process of pulling troops out of Iraq quickly speeds up.
I do believe that the optimism is at least in part warranted because I believe that Obama's policies will be less focused on war and aggression than Bush's. At the same time Obama has declared that he is against a nuclear program in Iran, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't try to peacefully stop this from happening through dialogue instead of starting a war over it.
As far as if Obama's presidency will be good for either country, I agree with the article when it says that it is bad for the conservatives in the Iranian government because it will be harder for them to pin the blame on the U.S. and show them as the enemy. Hopefully this means that the reformists will be able to gain more power in the government so dialogue between the U.S. and Iran can actually occur. It was very interesting for me to hear that President Ahmadinejad had sent a congratulatory letter to President Obama- I think this means that he is also optimistic about this dialogue and might actually give it a chance. Or it could mean that he is trying to rally the support of the Iranian people for the upcoming elections by showing that he too approves of Obama as the majority of the Iranian people do.
My favorite part of the article was reading about how Barack Obama's name translates to Farsi because its kind of ironic that the name of a U.S. president translates into something so pleasant and revered in the Muslim religion and the Farsi language. I am with the Iranian people in the hope that he brings to the world what his name means!
A certain level of optimism is most certainly warranted. Clearly Obama has suggested changes to a US foreign policy which has had only marginal recent success. Iranians can see the possibility of more peaceful relations between our two countries and a less aggressive US in the region.
It is potentially a good thing for both countries. Obama's election may weaken the position of Ahmadinejad and some other hard line conservatives, but I think it may benefit the masses in both countries on the whole. Nobody knows if US policy will actually change, but the odds of peaceful relations are greater at this point than they were before.
I will say though, Iranians (much like Americans on Iran) have taken a defensive position toward the US. It just seems like a lot of Iranians believe most if not all of the tensions they have with the US are entirely the fault of the US. Regardless of who caused tentions, the burden of fixing things is clearly not entirely on America. If Iran wants more peaceful relations, they need to make compromises and reach out as well.
As a final thought, although Ahmadinejad seems to have altered his attitude with his letter to Obama, I'm not sure how successful US/Iran relations can be with him in office. Because of the negative views most Americans have of him, I think it would be easier to move relations forward with Ahmadinejad out and a leader like Khatami in office.
I did not expect such a strong reaction to the election of Obama. I personally believe that the relationship could go two very different routes with the elextion of obama. It could be very positive if talks go well. However Obama still does represent the country and I believe could take a firm approach to a nuclear Iran. If this happens I believe Iran will find out policies very similar to those under Bush. Obama does have an edge right now because everyone does look so positively on him and believes he can make a difference. I think it will be hard to say what will happen until he does actually start making decisions and conversing with these countries. If he tries to establish to much of a firm policy Iran will quickly lose support for him. However he has to prevent himself from being a pushover as well and make sure that he maintains a strong influence. As a lot of the other posts have said though, Obama is not as focused on war as Bush was. This simple fact alone could already change our foreign policy to Iran greatly.
On the subject of Ahmadinejad talking to Obama I agree with the post above. I think Ahmadenijad has very radical views towards certain subjects. Talks with Obama will be difficult because he is already disliked so much.
I’m extremely excited about the world’s reaction to the election of Obama. International Relations between the US and the rest of the world have been decaying for years. With the election of Obama I believe the world is beginning to understand that citizens in the US also want to see a change. I also think it’s great that so many groups of people take pride in Obama’s heritage – The Middle East, Africa and the US to name a few. If used wisely, this connection can be just what we need to mend relations and become once again a great country worth looking up to. It truly feels great to be proud of my country…..I can’t remember the last time that’s happened.
Here’s a link to pictures of reactions from around the world: http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1856660,00.html
I was surprised at the iranians reactions to Obama winning the election. That makes me feel good inside that the Iran people are supportive of our new leader and the change from our old. But the change wont be immediate and I hope the Iranian people dont hate Obama for that. He said that he would withdraw troops from the middle east and have foreign talks with but he has inherited a nightmare of a situation and has to deal with the domestic problems first. It will take much time to fufill the promises he made about the middle east, but it wont be immediate and i hope the iranian people still respect his word.
I think that the reaction of the people is very different from the reaction of government for a reason: the people, or at least the people interviewed in this article, would like to see more open dialogues with a figure who they admire and support. The government, on the other hand, would no longer have quite the same basis for uniting the people against a common enemy: the US. All in all, it will be interesting to see how Iran, and the rest of the world's governments regard the US, there is no longer the same justification for erroneously seeing the US as a nation of right-wing, racist voters. It will also be interesting to see how Clinton performs in her role as secretary of state in negotiations with Iran before the actual president is involved. If Tehran agrees to meet key demands it could mitigate international, and Israeli, concerns, but this might not be possible, even if the new administration does commit to negotiations.
I do believe that their optimism is warranted. However, Obama's new administration is pro-Israel, which poses a threat to US-Iranian relations. I, personally, am most hopeful for a return of an American Embassy in Iran. I would like for Iranians to be able to receive visas to visit America, within Iran. Regarding politics, I agree with Kevin. It is up to Iran to make the "change". Obama has spoken about talking without preconditions, but in order for a change in the US-Iranian relationship to occur, Iran will have to be willing and cooperative.
Post a Comment