Explicit in US President Obama’s approach toward Tehran is his desire to reach a deal on the nuclear program. Obama’s obsession with his own legacy in the Middle East could not be more obvious. Over the last years, he has left no stone unturned to lure the Iranians into a deal to cover his failures in almost all major challenges in this part of the world. Were it not for the opposition in Washington and the Iranian manipulation, Obama might have singed a bad deal a while ago. In last November, negotiators set June 30 a final deadline for an agreement. But western negotiators aim to get the deal sealed on the substance by next month. It remains to be seen whether Iran will be forthcoming and if yes at what price.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, sent President Obama a secret letter in response to an earlier secret letter sent by Obama. It is not a secret anymore that Obama’s letter offered a sort of Iranian-American cooperation in fighting the Islamic State (IS) if a deal on the nuclear program was reached. Not surprisingly, Obama has internalized the importance of Iran in the region and therefore he has been flirting with Tehran to work together. Casting aside Obama’s lack of experience in foreign policy and his hesitant leadership on issues that matter to almost everyone in this region, a deal with Iran that ignores the vital interests of the traditional US allies will not resonate well in key countries in this region, chief among them is Israel. Netanyahu is on record vowing to fight such a deal and in his speech to the Congress scheduled in early March Netanyahu will try to undermine Obama.
It is not as if the Iranians are not watching the development in Washington. Although Obama is willing to reach a deal, his party — Democrats — has already lost the majority in the two houses in the Congress. Adding insult to injury, his critics in the Congress are suggesting imposing further sanctions on Iran. But, instead of using threats of further sanction to negotiate with Iran from a position of strength to secure a good deal, Obama threatened that he would veto any bill on sanction! I believe that Obama could have used the Congress to cow the Iranian leadership but he did not.
While the contents of the new secret letter are still unknown, Khamenei said a few days ago that he would not reject a compromise in the negotiations. His statement may reflect the contents of the letter but it seems that Khamenei has tilted toward the Iranian President Hassan Rowhani’s intention to reach a compromise with the western powers. His new position is set to tip the balance of power between hard-liners at home who oppose a deal and Rowhani’s team who think that Iran will be better off with a deal with the West. Rowhani’s team is concerned with the grave consequences of the imposed sanctions given Iran’s over-commitment especially in Syria. In other words, lifting the sanctions is a priority for Rowhani.
Obama has yet to understand how Iranians operate. First, IS has not posed a mortal threat to the Syrian regime. Hence, sending Khamenei a letter describing the shared interest in fighting IS may not be tempting especially when Obama made it perfectly clear in this letter that such cooperation was contingent on a deal on the nuclear program. Second, Iranian hard-liners are the ones who call the shots. Seen in this way, the only way to force them to cooperate is by emasculating them internally and there is nothing better than more painful sanctions to deliver that result. In other words, Obama has been soft on Iran.
Far from being assuring, Obama is hurting his allies in the Middle East. He views Iran as an important player whether in a constructive or negative way. But thus far, Iran has been a negative player that has helped perpetuate the misery of the Syrians. Needless to say, a bad deal with Iran may vindicate the confrontationist hard-liners in Iran.
