A year after President Obama's historic outreach to the Islamic Republic, Iranians believe it will take more than well wishes to win their hearts, Rasha Saad reports When last year US President Barack Obama spoke of a new beginning with the Islamic Republic of Iran in a videotaped message to the Iranian people, who were celebrating their New Year, or Norooz, many were optimistic that decades of hostility between the two sides was coming to an end. This year, Washington's Iranian New Year message, in which Obama renewed his offer of dialogue and diplomacy, has failed to impress the Iranians. Indeed, if anything, the videotaped message of Saturday was an occasion for both countries to trade accusations and was a reminder of the failure of both sides to move forward in their relations. While Obama lamented that the Iranian regime rebuffed his gesture, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the US president's words contradict with his actions. In his speech, Obama said Washington was committed to a better future for Iranians "even as we continue to have differences with the Iranian government." Obama, however, lashed at the Iranian regime. "Over the course of the last year, it is the Iranian government that has chosen to isolate itself and to choose a self-defeating focus on the past over a commitment to build a better future," Obama said. "We are familiar with your grievances from the past -- we have our own grievances as well. But we are prepared to move forward. We know what you're against; now tell us what you're for," he added. Obama criticised Tehran's reaction to his offer of dialogue and underlined the United States' belief Iran had the right to "peaceful nuclear energy" if it met international obligations. "You have refused good faith proposals from the international community," Obama said. "Faced with an extended hand, Iran's leaders have shown only a clenched fist." Khamenei told a gathering of Iranians in the religious city of Mashad in northeastern Iran that "the US president's message speaks of normalising relations but in practice plotted against the Islamic Republic." Khamenei also lashed out at US for its "arrogant attitude". "Sometimes the US speaks like a fox but acts as a wolf," Khamenei said. Many Iranians seem to agree with their leader. "A year after Obama pledged change in US policy towards Iran we are back to square one, if not behind it," Mohamed Hassan Khani, professor in the Faculty of Political Science and Islamic Studies at Imam Sadiq University in Tehran told Al-Ahram Weekly. Khani believes that the Americans "are not ready to pay a price for opening a new chapter and winning the trust of the Iranian nation." Many Iranians recognised Obama's change in language last year, being the first US president who called the Iranian state by its official name, the Islamic Republic of Iran. The effect of this symbolic gesture, however, dissipated quickly. The first reason is Obama's approval of renewing US unilateral sanctions against Iran. The president signed the sanctions bill at the same time that his New Year message was being aired to the Iranian nation last year. The sanctions, which ban US companies from investing in or trading with Iran, have been renewed annually since 1995. Second is the stance that the White House adopted in dealing with post-election events. "The fact that the US administration could not hide its excitement and joy over the post-election turmoil in Tehran, celebrating what many Americans saw as the beginning the fall of the Islamic Revolution, badly damaged any hope for positive change in US policy," Khani explained. Following post-election unrest in June, Iranian authorities drew strong US condemnation following its crackdown on opposition protesters. While Obama insisted then that he respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic, Khani argues that Iranians still demand "US recognition of Iranian legitimate rights, as a sovereign state, in many issues." According to Gamal Salama, political science professor at Suez Canal University, Obama "talks much and does little". Salama told the Weekly that despite the US president's personal goodwill, he is unlikely to change his country's stance towards Iran due to home and foreign pressures, not least from Israel. "Despite his popularity, Obama proved to be a weak president who failed to make many of the promised changes in the Middle East and elsewhere." Salama believes that relations with Iran will be stagnant for sometime to come as the US has few options. He explains that the US cannot afford to direct a military strike in the near future. At the same time the Israeli lobby and the neo-cons will prevent any rapprochement with Iran by exaggerating its nuclear threat. Meanwhile, the US is pushing for intensifying international sanctions against Iran over its refusal to freeze its uranium enrichment activities. The US says it fears Iran's nuclear programme is a cover to build atomic weapons. Iran insists its activities are for peaceful purposes only. According to reports, the US has agreed with Britain, France and Germany on the draft proposal for a fourth round of UN sanctions. The new sanctions would place new restrictions on Iranian banks and target the Revolutionary Guard and firms linked to it. Washington has been struggling for years to convince China and Russia, both veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council and key allies of Iran, to agree to intensify sanctions. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin told visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday that Russian support for a new UN sanctions resolution was possible, reports said. However, US lobbying against Iran coincides with former US Secretary of State Colin Powell's acknowledgment that Iran's nuclear programme is not aimed at making nuclear bombs. In remarks made Friday, the retired US Army general said the dispute over Iran's nuclear programme should be tackled through diplomacy and negotiations, arguing that Tehran was "determined to have a nuclear programme" not a "nuclear weapon". "I don't see a set of sanctions coming along that would be so detrimental to the Iranians that they are going to stop that programme," Powell argued. Salama shares this viewpoint. He explained that, contrary to the US argument, more sanctions on Iran might be of benefit to the Islamic Republic. "Iran has survived every set of sanctions since the 1979 Islamic Revolution and emerged as powerful and undefeated. More sanctions and threats might help unite the Iranian internal front that is divided following the presidential elections."
