In recent months, international attention on Iran has shifted from
the usual fear and disapproval of its policies to an attitude of hopeful intrigue. In the months between President Hassan Rouhani’s election in June and the much-publicized phone call between Rouhani and President Obama on September 27, concerns over Iran seemed to subside. Iran has leapt into the spotlight once again now, and a lively debate has emerged over the possibility of a new Iran under Rouhani’s leadership. Ultimately, the change in Iran’s leadership does not necessarily indicate drastic changes in Iranian public opinion, but rather a diplomatic window of opportunity.
Understanding Rouhani
Rouhani’s election June 14 was hailed as a victory for moderates and seemed to signal a move away from the global opposition of the previous era. Nicknamed the “diplomat sheik,” Rouhani won an election that suggested a major change
in Iran’s foreign policy, which he affirmed through continual references to diplomacy in early August. At the United Nations, Rouhani addressed what he believed the Iranian people wanted in their new leader, stating, “The recent election in Iran represents a clear, living example of the wise choice of hope, rationality and moderation by the great people of Iran.”
Rouhani possesses a diverse background of scholarly, religious, and political experience. In addition to his role as a cleric, he holds degrees from the University of Tehran and the Glasgow Caledonian University and served as secretary
of the Supreme National Security Council from 1989 to 2005. He also participated in the Assembly of Experts, the Supreme Defense Council, Iran’s Armed Forces, the Center for Strategic Research, and the Expediency Council. Perhaps his most discussed role, however, is that of chief nuclear negotiator for Iran from 2003 to 2005.
According to Behnam Ben Taleblu, an expert on Iran, Rouhani is sometimes mislabeled as a reformist due to his past. “It is important not to conflate who Rouhani is with who we may want him to be,” Taleblu said. “When I look at President Rouhani, the traditional school I would equate him with is not the reformism of Khatami, but rather the classical conservative-pragmatism of the Rafsanjani era.” However, Taleblu emphasizes that “debates about Rouhani’s ‘moderation’
or ‘cunning’ might be missing the point—Rouhani is a well-educated bureaucrat who is acquainted with process and deliberations, as exhibited by his strong security-oriented resume.” Indeed, it seems that Rouhani’s ability to compromise, his experiences, and his scholarly background were emphasized during the election, as reflected by his campaign slogan of “moderation and wisdom.”
Between the Election and the Call
One of Rouhani’s first goals was to lessen international hostility aimed at Iran and enhance its global image. He articulated certain guidelines for such a discussion in an address to the Iranian Parliament in early August: “The only way for interaction with Iran is dialogue on an equal footing, confidence-building, and mutual respect as well as reducing antagonism and aggression.” Rouhani’s statement indicated hope of reconciliation with the U.S. and other Western nations to repair the relationship damaged by his predecessor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In an interview with the Washington Post, Rouhani stated that he hopes a compromise on nuclear issues will be reached within months rather than years.
However, there seemed to be a standstill rather than a jump to action following Rouhani’s election. Obama and Rouhani did exchange letters, but the stark contrast between Rouhani’s moderate policies and his predecessor’s aggression suggested that the reconciliation between the U.S. and Iran would be jumpstarted as soon as he assumed power. Though the progress may appear slow, the actions that have been taken have been major milestones. Dr. Payam Mohseni, a visiting professor at Harvard, explained, “The progress is already very fast. When Iran says it wants to solve this issue in six months to a year—that’s fast.”
This progress is particularly drastic considering the long history of tension between the United States and Iran dating back as far as the coup of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953. The phone call between Obama and Rouhani marked the first time a U.S. President had spoken directly to an Iranian leader since 1979. Similarly, the meeting of Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif was the first time in 30 years that Iranian and American dignitaries met in person. These moves seem to suggest that the reconciliation is meant to go beyond the rifts of the past eight years to repair decades of disagreement. In fact, Rouhani referenced U.S.-Iran relations in a news conference as “an old wound that needs to be … healed.”
Putting Actions to Words
While the phone call was unquestionably a progressive
move by both nations, this interaction only hinted at the major underlying sources of recent tension: Iran’s nuclear program and economic sanctions. American officials have asked for greater transparency to ensure the absence of nuclear weapons while Iranian leaders desire the removal of sanctions to bolster the economy. In fact, Iran seems open to the desired transparency, with Rouhani stating in his first news conference, “We are ready to show greater transparency and make clear that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s actions are totally within international frameworks.”
However, a debate over the extent of Rouhani’s abilities to follow through with his statements has emerged. Mohseni suggested that the Ayatollah Khamenei has given Rouhani greater freedom so that he can test the origins of U.S.-Iran tension: “For many of the Iranian elite, particularly the Supreme Leader, the nuclear issue is not at the heart of the matter. The main issue is the Islamic Republic and the existence of the Islamic Republic—that the West is bent on regime change and it’s using the nuclear program as a means to impose pressure on Iran.” Mohseni suggests that failure to resolve tension and the nuclear issue may indicate deeper issues between the nations.
Others, such as Taleblu, also agree that Rouhani has the power to make significant changes but believe that economic relief rather than an affirmation of beliefs is the key factor. Taleblu stated, “In short, Khamenei and the establishment also are coming to the table for sanctions relief.” In a recent address by Khamenei to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Supreme Leader touted a concept called ‘heroic flexibility’ and likened Iranian diplomacy to wrestling—budging here and there, but “keeping your eyes on the prize.” Whether the prize in mind is economic relief or evidence of deeper issues, it seems that Rouhani has received approval to work towards a nuclear agreement.
Approval of nuclear talks and reconciliation has not only come from the rulers: the public has also supported Rouhani his pursuit of diplomacy. Following his conversation with Obama, Rouhani set up an Internet poll to help quantify support for his actions. According to Dr. Fatemeh Keshavarz, director of the Roshan Center for Persian Studies, the poll showed immense support for Rouhani’s actions: “When [Rouhani] went back to Iran, he conducted an online poll, and close to 90 percent of Iranians responded overwhelming by saying that they wanted to normalize relations with the U.S.” Thus, it seems that Rouhani has the support of both the necessary leaders and the Iranian people to negotiate and cooperate with the United States on the nuclear issue.
A Delicate Future
Iranians chose a new president with goals more in line with a greater proportion of the people, and now the process of reconciliation has begun. And while Iranian politics may seem fundamentally different, it is important to realize that the current situation is the result of the evolution of the Iranian government and the desires of the people rather than a sudden change. “It’s an evolving dynamic of where the regime is today, so it’s not suddenly a ‘new Iran,’” Mohseni added. “There is this new opportunity to reach out because of the way the forces are now aligned in Iran, but it is nothing new in the sense that this is a completely different system or country or population.” Mohseni stressed that we are dealing with “the same issues and questions” that existed before the revolution.
But Rouhani’s goals and background seem to reveal a new opportunity for diplomacy. Rouhani will no doubt have pressure to deliver some indication of progress within the timeline he has created, says Taleblu. “At some point in his first year, if not in the coming months, the Rouhani administration will make
a concerted push to work out a revised framework for nuclear negotiations and guide the talks in an active way that we have not seen since Rouhani was in charge of the nuclear file in the Supreme National Security Council,” Taleblu stated.
But the changes under Rouhani cannot end with a nuclear agreement. Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, suggests that Rouhani needs to improve domestic conditions as well to enhance Iran’s global image. “More than anything, the Rouhani government needs to improve the human rights situation inside of Iran,” he told the HPR. Keshavarz hopes that the future will also bring a greater appreciation of Iranian culture and “humanize Iranian society.” Specifically, she cited the approximately 99 percent literacy rate of males and females between the ages of 15 and 25, the high university attendance rates of women, and the prevalence of bloggers in Iran. She believes that better understanding of the culture will enhance possibilities at reconciliation.
The steps towards normalized U.S.-Iranian relations thus far have been momentous, and many hope that Rouhani’s policies will go beyond the nuclear talks to a lasting and effective nuclear agreement, an effort to eliminate domestic problems, and ultimately lead to a better understanding of the Iranian culture. While it is difficult to determine how much further the reconciliation process will go, there is no doubt that the current window of opportunity can lead to immense changes in Iran’s image and relationships with other nations.