Two Steps Forward, One Step Back in the Middle East

Up until the June 12th election in Iran, most observers outside that country thought there was a good chance that former prime minister Mir Hossein Mousavi would unseat President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A week before the election, most experts believed it would certainly be close, perhaps there would be a run-off between the two, but few, if any, predicted that Ahmadinejad would win in a landslide. And no one foresaw massive street protests over a "stolen election."

Everything seemed to be going well for the U.S. in the Muslim world, in no small part because President Obama is not President Bush. The more Bush attacked the Iranian regime, the greater the support for Ahmadinejad. By contrast, Obama reached out to Iran, recognizing its pivotal role as a regional power.

On March 20th, in a video-taped message for Nowruz, the Persian New Year, he spoke directly to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, a clear acknowledgement of the revolution 30 years ago and of the current regime.

More important, he demonstrated an understanding of Persian culture and its accomplishments: "Nowruz," he said, "is just one part of your great and celebrated culture. Over many centuries your art, your music, literature and innovation have made the world a better and more beautiful place. Here in the United States our own communities have been enhanced by the contributions of Iranian Americans. We know that you are a great civilization, and your accomplishments have earned the respect of the United States and the world."

Obama's exaggerated praise for the contributions of Persian civilization may have been seen as hyperbole in the United States, but in Iran it was accepted as a form of "ta'arof," a Farsi word which amounts to making others feel welcome and valued using generous and gracious compliments.

Obama told Iranians that he wanted "the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right -- but it comes with real responsibilities, and that place cannot be reached through terror or arms but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization."

And he used the words of the famous medieval Persian poet Saadi: "'The children of Adam are limbs to each other, having been created of one essence.' With the coming of a new season, we're reminded of this precious humanity that we all share. And we can once again call upon this spirit as we seek the promise of a new beginning. Thank you, and Eid-eh Shoma Mobarak."

In his April 6th speech in Ankara, Obama told the Muslim world that the United States is not at war with Islam and would be engaged in the Middle East with"mutual interests and mutual respect." He repeated this in his June 4th speech in Cairo.

Obama has an informed cultural empathy with Muslims in the Middle East. He seems to understand their worldviews, beliefs and values and to walk in their psychological and cultural shoes. Obama ended his Nowruz greeting with a very good pronunciation of the Farsi phrase Eid-eh Shoma Mobarak--- HappyPersian New Year. In the first minute of his Cairo speech he greeted Muslims around the world with the traditional Arab Islamic phrase, Assalaamu Alaykum---peace be upon you. He used quotes and stories from the Koran throughout his speech and many were surprised with his excellent Arabic pronunciation.

He referred to the Holy Koran, not just the Koran, told the story of Issrain which Moses, Jesus and the Prophet Mohammed joined in prayer. After their names, he used the traditional respectful phrase "peace be upon them" and he ended his Cairo address in English with the phase "and may God's peace be upon you," which translated nicely into Arabic.

In his speeches dealing with the Middle East, Obama always refers to the past but focuses on the future, which is particularly appealing to those who want change, especially the young. The phrase "a new beginning" has been used a number of times in multiple ways. "I've come here to Cairo," he said, "to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles -- principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings."

At the end of his Cairo speech he returned to this theme: "I know there are many -- Muslim and non-Muslim -- who question whether we can forget this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort, that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There's so much fear, so much mistrust that has built up over the years. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country -- you, more than anyone, have the ability to re-imagine the world, to remake this world."

The messenger is as important as the message in the Middle East. Obama is perceived as new and modern, but also as someone who understands the past, product of a mixture of cultures and races, who knows firsthand what it means to be part of a minority that experienced racial or political oppression. He linked the nonviolence of the civil rights movement in America with rejecting extremismin in the Middle East. And he emphasized that "throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality."

Many Arabs describe Obama as humble, a character trait admired in the Middle East, especially when contrasted with the so-called "arrogance" of earlier American leaders. There is no doubt about the overwhelming power of the U.S. But there is a profound respect for those who don't use their power and who try to resolve conflicts through negotiation and mediation. He said, "Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: 'I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be."'

It is important to note that substantive U.S. foreign-policy positions were clearly outlined in the Cairo speech. It wasn't just a matter of style and context. Obama bluntly opposed the development of nuclear weapons in Iran and succinctly supported the existence of an Israel free from external threat. But he also emphasized the need for a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and insisted on a freeze of Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory. He referred to the "occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza, a significant choice of words in the Islamic world, and he quite consciously avoided the use of "terrorism" and "terrorists" and instead referred to"violent extremists."

Although difficult to prove any cause and effect relationship, a few days after the Cairo speech, Lebanese voters delivered a solid defeat to Hezbollah in the parliamentary election. Tired of conflict and extremism, they apparently favored discussion and diplomacy over violence.

Against this regional backdrop, with the Iranian economy in a slump, plagued with high interest rates, skyrocketing real estate prices and unemployment, it seemed to Western observers that Ahmadinejad would find it very difficult to remain in office. In the week before the election, young people who have been most severely impacted by the economic downturn, seemed to overwhelmingly support Mousavi, and women seemed energized by Ahmadinejad's brutal verbal attacks on Mousavi's wife, a respected political scientist and university professor who had campaigned by his side - a radical departure in Iran.

Ahmadinejad's opponents emphasized during the campaign that he was bankrupting the country, squandering its oil wealth, and leaving Iran open to international ridicule. Obama underscored this during his early June visit to Buchenwald. "To this day," he said, "there are those who insist that the Holocaust never happened -- a denial of fact and truth that is baseless and ignorant and hateful."

Given Obama's search for "new beginnings," the defeat of Hezbollah, and the apparently massive support for Mousavi, most thought this would be a close election. The Iranian government, however, stunned the world by announcing a 2-1 landslide for Ahmadinejad. Mousavi immediately rejected the official results as fraudulent and called for a recount.

In the week since the election, massive pro-Mousavi and pro-Ahmadinejad rallies have rocked Tehran and other major cities. Initially restrained government reactions to the Mousavi demonstrations have hardened as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamaneisupported the official election results, rejected street protests and warned of bloodshed if they continued.

While the outcome of these events is not yet clear, what they have revealed is a splintering of the Iranian elite that reflects the broader divisions of Iranian society. Ahmadinejad has mobilized millions of poorer Iranians who are content with strict interpretations of Islam and benefit from his oil-revenue-based public spending and massive subsidies, while Mousavi has mobilized the relatively better off, more educated who seek to evolve a less strict, more modern interpretation of Islam and a more stable economy that invests oil revenues for longer-term social gain.

Despite the Polyanna-ish observations of some who view Mousavi and his supporters as liberal reformers, what is happening must be viewed through an appropriate Iranian prism, not a Western one. This is not the beginning of the end of the Islamic Republic of Iran, nor a rupture of the broad Iranian consensus that Iran has the right to develop nuclear power. Even if the government is forced by popular unrest to loosen its more authoritarian ways, and even if the "new beginning" sought by Obama is launched, the U.S. will still have to deal with a proud regional power that seeks acceptance and respect for its role in the Middle East and Central Asia.