Preparing the Political Atmosphere for a Deal

Rooz Online

As more reports about the possibility of improved relations between Iran and the US emerge, and as officials from both sides express open optimism about this, Iran’s media closely associated with the ruling circles have reduced their traditional negative rhetoric about the possibility of talks between the two adversaries and now portray such relations to be to the detriment of Israel.

Speaking about possible relations between the US and Iran, Mansur Haghighatpour, a member of the presiding board of the national security committee of the Majlis told the young journalists club (Bashgahe Khabarnegarane Javan), affiliated to the state-run national radio and television organization, “The correction of US-Iran relations would break the backbone of the Zionist regime and the regressive regimes in the region. IF the Zionist regime has a place in the hearts of the Europeans and the Americans, it is because of the Iran fear-mongering. But if we launch active diplomacy in the world and it becomes clear that we are pursuing our genuine rights and are not interested in adventurism, not only will the Zionist regime but the other regressive regimes in the region too will die out of anger.”

Expressions of hope regarding US-Iran relations went public after Iran’s leader ayatollah Khamenei declared on September 17 last week in the presence of Revolutionary Guards that he was not against “heroic flexibility” in diplomacy, followed by president Hassan Rowhani remarks that he had full authority to resolve the nuclear standoff.

Meanwhile, Mohammad Dehghan, a Majlis presidium member, said this about “heroic flexibility”: We can change our tactics to attain our principal goals through ways that are reflective of current conditions. Sometimes, we may choose to be harsh and aggressive measures to attain our goals while at other times it may be necessary to change our strategy and actions with special tactical means to attain the goals. It may sometimes be necessary to keep the war front quiet or to show flexibility there. Which means that we shall not attack and let calm prevail in the fronts.” He stressed that, “Offense and flexibility of the Islamic regime in the war front are in line with attaining the key strategic goal, which is support of the deprived in the world against any injustice. It is the same under the current circumstances and we shall never retreat from our fixed principles, even though we may show flexibility to the enemy. Still, we shall never forget that he is the enemy and shall never forget our enemies. But if necessary, we shall temporarily stop attacks. But regardless of whether we engage in offense or display flexibility, both behaviors are ‘heroic’”.

The editor of hardline Kayhan newspaper who is directly appointed by the supreme leader also presented his take on the term. “Heroic flexibility is a political field where give-and-take becomes relevant. It is clear that the side that is presenting heroic flexibility must create the give-and-take atmosphere. The party attains his goals through shrewdness, smartness and with less cost than heroic offensive. In today’s language, he imposes his national interest with less cost. The player who utilizes heroic flexibility gives away some short-term and tactical points or benefits so as to improve his strategic position or at the least strengthen it. The external image of this approach is fundamentally different from its content. Some have called this a win-win approach because each side gains something, even if only tactically. The reality is that this is a win-lose game in which the party that pursues heroic flexibility is the winner, while the opponent losses something.”

Kayhan has published this article even though about a month ago after the visit of Oman’s Sultan Qaboos to Iran and the publication of rumors that he was carrying a message from the US for Iran, it had written, “Is the current difference superficial and resolvable or do they have a problem with our existence? The question can be asked differently: Did Americans have a problem with former elected president but have no animosity with the newly elected president? Was there a personal problem and have the US president and Congress not enacted new sanctions against Iran in the two months since Dr Rowhani replaced Dr Ahmadinejad, something that should make us disregard these realities?”

Along with these reports, Reuter’s news agency has reported that American and Israeli officials have met and American officials have tried to convince Israelis that US policy over Iran’s nuclear program is not a threat against Israel.

It has also been reported that US President Obama’s letter to Hassan Rowhani talks of US “readiness to end the nuclear conflict with Iran provided that Iran demonstrates that it is not pursuing nuclear weapons.”