NEW YORK - If there is one member of US President Barack Obama's administration who is taken seriously by Iran's rulers, it's Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Clinton, who is currently on a tour of the Middle East, said on Sunday in Abu Dhabi that Iran was fuelling conflict in the region. She then asked the Arab nations to put more pressure on Iran by committing themselves to the international sanctions on the country. Referring to Iran's controversial nuclear programme, she said, “The timeline is not as important as the international effort to try to ensure that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons”. Apparently, the real purpose of her tour is to apologise to the US allies in the Middle East for what has been leaked by WikiLeaks, showing Washington's real aims and intentions towards Iran, and embarrassing most of the Arab leaders. But even Clinton's direct approach and apology don't appear to be enough to reduce their disappointment. When Clinton talked about Iran's nuclear ambitions and asked the Arab allies to unify against this, her audience, students at Zayed University in Abu Dhabi, asked her about Israel's nuclear arsenal. She said that the US wanted a nuclear-free Middle East, but couldn't think of anything else to say apart from this general comment. Many Middle Eastern scholars believe that the dual-standard behaviour of the US towards the Arab world and Israel has led to a change in what ordinary Arabs think about Iran's nuclear programme. Iran may be seen as a potential threat by the Arab leaders because of its support for Hamas and Hizbollah, but it is no longer seen as a threat by ordinary working-class Arabs, who are fed up with the way their leaders flatter Western rulers. At least for them Iran is a symbol of resistance. The average Middle Eastern citizen probably knows little about the Iranian people or what they think about their rulers, but this same citizen probably admires the President of Iran and the Supreme Leader for fearlessly challenging the Western powers and caring for the other Muslim nations too. For this citizen, Iran is a role model. The simplicity of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who, according to one of his aides, only has three different suits to wear on official occasions, impresses many Arabs, whose own, hugely wealthy leaders are far more ostentatious. In his game with the West, Ahamdinejad is counting on the influence and support he knows exists among working-class Arabs. Because of this support, he is taking a gamble with the Western powers and its neighbours, pushing for nuclear technology and changing his country's image. Clinton, who is busy with her ‘apology tour', has a difficult task to convince the Arab leaders to side with the US in upping the pressure on Iran. The new round of meetings in Istanbul between Iran and the 5+1 powers is only a few days away, while Clinton is busy visiting the UAE, Amman and Qatar, to drum up support for tougher sanctions on Tehran. It is hard to believe that, in Istanbul, Iran will make a dramatic shift in its programme or the Western countries will lift the sanctions and stop asking Iran to give up enriching uranium. Why bother with these meetings in Istanbul at all? If these meeting stopped, there would be more hostility towards Iran and its nuclear programme, which could lead to a terrible confrontation that both sides have avoided so far. These meetings offer a little hope that action will be delayed and the IAEA inspectors will stay in Iran.
