Iran: Opposition to US Pressure and Intervention

The letter by the Iranian President Mahmood Ahmadinejad to President Bush had a major reflection in the world and in the Iranian mass media. The western countries, including the United States declared the content of the letter irrelevant to the recent problems and the international crisis over the Iranian nuclear issue. They declared the response to the letter fruitless. Some of the prominent political and social figures in Iran also assessed the Ahmadinejad's letter as shallow and full of slogans. The interesting point is that those who not so long ago would brand any contact with or resuming of any relations with the United States as 'betrayal of the Khomeini's way', so suddenly are advocating face to face negotiations (about Iraq) and writing letters to the 'great Satan'. According to a report by ISNA news agency, Ahmadinejad, in response to a question whether the negotiations with the U.S. will be face to face said: 'We favor negotiations, but it is normal that different sides have different conditions. We have no conditions for negotiations, but those who want to negotiate with bad manners and insult have to change themselves.' He continued: 'If someone puts a weapon on your temple and says talk, of course you would not talk.' Ahmadinejad rejected the possibility of military assault by the U.S. against Iran and said: 'It is not very likely that they do anything irrational. But in anyway we will be ready for every situation.'

On the same issue, Mohammad Khatami, the previous Iranian president, said: 'Everything must be done according to the strategic views and the expediencies and the general policies of the country'. He added: 'For sure there should be a plan and motivation behind writing this letter.' In response to a question about his interview with the CNN in 1997, he said: 'When in 1997, I interviewed with the CNN, Iran was not in a good standing in the public opinion of the world and the Americans. With that interview, I was going to change that situation and the result was that Albright talked frankly about the mistakes and wrong policies of the United States against Iran. Clinton also, in his speech at the time, in a way, apologized and the position of U.S. changed.' The president of the International Institute for Dialogue between Cultures and Civilizations continued: 'Also, Imam Khomeini's opinion was that if U.S. apologizes, the door for negotiations will be open. At the time, the general policy of the regime was not based on negotiations with the U.S. and today also, I don't know what the motivation and plan is behind writing this letter and what effects it will have. I don't know if this letter is written to indicate that Iran is ready for negotiations or the regime's strategy with respect to U.S. has changed.'

Ahmadinejad's letter was sent to Bush when shortly before that the Foreign Affairs ministers of the five members of the Security Council, in intense negotiations, were trying to reach an agreement on a resolution about Iran. Of course, the resolution submitted by the U.S., Britain and France was opposed by Russia and China. In an interview with the CNN, Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. secretary of state, said that an agreement was reached that the European countries will present Iran with a set of proposals to break the present deadlock and give Iran two weeks to give a positive response to these proposals.

Besides all that, the TIME magazine published a letter by Hassan Rohani, the representative of the Supreme Leader in the National Security Council that contained his proposals for solving the present deadlock. Tudeh Party of Iran believes that by reducing the tension and opening the way for negotiations, the way for issuing a resolution against Iran in the Security Council should be blocked. Past experiences, specially the painful developments in Iraq showed that issuing loose resolutions with very general statements and terms would open the way for intervention and pressure against the country. That is why this should be prevented with all the power in our disposal.

More than relating to the Iranian nuclear programs, the background of the present tensions have to do with the plans and policies of the imperialism in the region and the role of the present Iranian government against it. The military presence of the imperialist forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries in the region has resulted in escalating of tensions and ethnic-religious conflicts. By the same token any intensification of the military operations in the region, including military aggression against Iran, will result in even higher tensions and intensification of flames of war and the bloodshed in the entire region. It is hard to find any humanist and peace loving force who is not worried about the present situation and the outcome of the political-militaristic confrontations, especially in the 'barrel of gunpowder' of the world the Middle East. Avoiding new conflicts is an important and indispensable part of the struggle to force out the alien military forces from the Persian Gulf and the Middle East region and establish peace in this high tension region of the world.

Once again, the Tudeh Party of Iran warns against the rising tensions and the issue of Security Council resolution against Iran. We believe the world public opinion in its vast majority, and definitively, are against a new war and military intervention in the internal affairs of Iran. Considering this fact, and by conducting negotiations and employing all the possible means for peaceful settlement of the present problems, the way must be opened for protecting the national interests of Iran and the peace in the region and the world.

Unlike some of the political forces in Iran, Tudeh Party of Iran does not believe that the external intervention in Iran is the way to achieve freedom and democratic rights for Iranian people. The experience of other countries in the region is a definite witness to the invalidity of these positions.

The struggle of our people against the dictatorial regime of Velayate Faqih (the Governance of the Supreme Religious Leader) is an internal affair and will succeed only with the participation of all the Iranian progressive social and political forces. The Iranian people have the political maturity, the determination and the necessary awareness for solving their problems of any kind. Any aggressive intervention in the internal affairs of such a country will face a definite defeat.

The struggle of new against the old, modernism against conservatism, knowledge against superstition and democracy against dictatorship have found deep and growing roots in our society. External intervention, especially militarily, will have a negative effect on its growth rate and in the final analysis will help the reaction and the dictatorship. It will set the region more on the path of fire and bloodshed

--From 'Nameh Mardom,' Editorial, Central Organ of the Tudeh Party of Iran, 11th May 2006