[There are no outward indications that Mr. Khamenei is enthusiastic about rapprochement between Iran and the United States , these other analysts say. On the contrary, since August he has used every public speech to make clear that there will be no such thing, repeating last week that, deal or no deal, the United States remains the “Great Satan.”]
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned on
Wednesday of foreign enemy subversions.
Credit Office of the
Iranian Supreme Leader, via European Pressphoto Agency
|
TEHRAN — Negotiating the
nuclear agreement was a torturous, two-year process for Iran’s leaders, but a
new kind of struggle is unfolding now in Iran, where the supreme leader,
Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, and President Hassan Rouhani have begun to tackle a
question Iranians have not thought about much since the revolution 37 years
ago: How to deal with their great enemy, the United States, after having
reached a compromise with it.
The two leaders are offering starkly opposing visions of Iran ’s post-deal future, reflecting
their divergent attitudes toward the “Great Satan.”
“We
have announced that we will not negotiate with the Americans on any issue other
than the nuclear case,” Mr. Khamenei said this month. Speaking to a group of
hard-line students recently he was even more explicit, telling them to “prepare
for the continuation of the fight against America .”
By contrast, Mr.
Rouhani said on Sunday that the nuclear agreement was “not the end of the way,”
but “a beginning for creating an atmosphere of friendship and cooperation with
various countries.”
How the opposing visions are ultimately
resolved may be uncertain, but as the nuclear pact is carried out and the
sanctions are lifted, Iran ’s favorite scapegoat can no longer plausibly
be regarded as the root of all evil in the world.
“Our Great Satan without sanctions is just not the same
anymore,” said Saeed Laylaz, an economist and supporter of Mr. Rouhani.
“Perhaps we should use ‘lesser Satan’ now or something like that.
In a highly controlled society like Iran , the leaders rarely speak
spontaneously, so there is a certain premeditated “good cop, bad cop” aspect to
the public posturing about the United States . But the dueling perspectives
also reflect the problem of fitting the new, softer image of the United States into Iran ’s founding ideological
narrative.
Those longing for Iran to be a normal country, with
normal relations with the world, believe their time has finally come, no matter
what the supreme leader is saying. By their lights, change is inevitable, and
Ayatollah Khamenei is just protecting his political flank against the hard-line clerics and
commanders who oppose the nuclear deal.
But other analysts say that
misreads the situation, putting a naïvely optimistic spin on the motivations
and intentions of an all-powerful supreme leader who, while cautious and
calculating, remains a highly conservative force.
There are no outward indications that Mr. Khamenei is
enthusiastic about rapprochement between Iran and the United States , these other analysts say. On
the contrary, since August he has used every public speech to make clear that
there will be no such thing, repeating last week that, deal or no deal, the United States remains the “Great Satan.”
“This deal is a one-off agreement in our interest,” said
Hamidreza Taraghi, a hard-line analyst close to Mr. Khamenei. “Not an attempt
to mend ties with America .”
There will be no such thing as direct talks over other issues,
like Iraq , Syria and Yemen . At best, some analysts say,
Mr. Khamenei is awaiting what he calls in some speeches “positive steps” from
the United States . He will “review” such actions
before considering real relations.
“If they do not leave the region and keep Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad in power, the leader doesn’t see any future in having relations
with America,” said one former Revolutionary Guards official, who spoke on the condition
of anonymity because of his position, adding, “For now, that does not seem
likely to happen.”
Whatever the effect on foreign relations, Mr. Khamenei’s genuine
distrust of the United States is casting an increasingly dark shadow over Mr.
Rouhani’s ambitions at home, which are always subject to a veto by the supreme
leader, who retains the final word on all matters.
Over the past two years, the president, who came to power
promising an end to Iran ’s international isolation and
a more “normal” life, has raised expectations among
Iran’s middle class. He has done so while tiptoeing around the sensitive
subject of establishing relations with the United States , which has become a symbol of
the changes many people would like to see, such as more personal freedom and
overhauling the archaic justice system.
Right
after the nuclear agreement was signed, for example, some in Tehran called for abolishing the
‘‘death to America ’’ slogan and predicted the
reopening of the United States Embassy. Neither suggestion gained traction.
Now, in line with Mr. Khamenei’s recent remarks, the winds seem
to be shifting. Night after night, state television features remarks by
American politicians and Republican presidential candidates bashing the deal.
Often, these are followed by I-told-you-so clips from Mr. Khamenei, saying “America cannot be trusted.”
Mr. Rouhani’s supporters are taking note. “First, I predicted
that direct flights between Tehran and New York would start in some weeks,”
said Mohammad Javad Mehreghan, a financial expert. “We were overwhelmed with
joy. Now, I realize it will take years. This country won’t change overnight.”
Many say Mr. Rouhani should be
content with having prevented war over Iran ’s nuclear program, unfrozen the country’s assets
and opened the door to foreign investment. “That has all along been the real
mandate given to the president,” said Nader Karimi Joni, a pro-government
journalist. “People who thought otherwise have been fooling themselves.”
But
the president is persevering, promising better relations with the West, a
better economy and more personal freedom. To the trained Iranian ear, when Mr.
Rouhani talks about more cooperation with “various countries,” he means the United States .
Despite Ayatollah Khamenei’s hard line in public, however, most
Iranians and some well-connected analysts say that he is more on Mr. Rouhani’s
side than he lets on, and is merely hedging his bets in case something goes
wrong. Otherwise, they say, why would he agree to a nuclear deal at all?
“In the end even the
supreme leader wants to have better relations with America ,” said Farshad Ghorbanpour, a
political analyst close to the government. “But he is angry over the bad
remarks coming out of the United States , so he wants to wait if the
deal works before he allows relations to get better.”
It was Mr. Khamenei himself who drew up the framework for
talking to the United States on the nuclear issue. He
allowed direct negotiations to take place only through a trusted foreign
minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif. Iran ’s original goal for the talks
was not to solve problems with the United States , but to get sanctions lifted.
There was only one glitch in Mr. Khamenei’s carefully planned
strategy, when in 2013 an overly enthusiastic Mr. Rouhani accepted a phone call
from President
Obama. While the conversation created considerable excitement in the
West, it did not go over well in Iran . Upon arrival in Tehran , Mr. Rouhani was pelted by
hard-liners with eggs and a shoe.
Some Iranian reformist newspapers are predicting hopefully that
Mr. Rouhani will meet Mr. Obama at the United Nations General
Assembly this month.
In contrast, last week a Friday Prayer leader said that Mr. Zarif had been told
— for the time being at least — to cease any direct negotiations with the
United States, though people close to Mr. Zarif deny this.
Many, perhaps most, Iranians — having had their hopes for change
dashed numerous times in the past, most recently in 2009 — have few
expectations that the nuclear agreement will fundamentally change anything.
“The deal will absolutely
happen,” said Mr. Karimi Joni, the journalist. But there will be no opening of
embassies, direct flights to New York or American investments here,
he predicted. “Unless the supreme leader thinks this is necessary for the
continuation of the system. In that case it will happen immediately.”
Others are not so sure, convinced that relations with the United States have been permanently altered,
despite the supreme leader’s pronouncements.
“Whatever anybody says, @ The New York Times