September 13, 2006
END-RUNNING AHMEDINEJAD:
Back from the brink, Iran and the US must now build comity: On his US trip, Khatami urged mild rhetoric and offered a way forward on Iraq. (Helena Cobban, 9/14/06, CS Monitor)
Khatami's suggestion that the US should engage Iraq's neighbors and the UN as it works out an endgame there seems very sensible to me. But would Khatami be the best "channel" for such an approach? Perhaps, or perhaps not. He has clear political differences with Mr. Ahmadinejad - but a much more nuanced relationship with Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has made increasingly clear in recent months that he is the real seat of power in the country.It was not clear to me whether Khatami was proposing himself for any key diplomatic role. What did seem clear was his commitment, in a general but philosophically deep way, to the ideals of peaceful coexistence that motivated his US trip. If this visit - and Mr. Bush's wisdom in letting it proceed - helps the world avoid a US-Iranian explosion and brings the two countries closer to improved relations, then that is already cause for huge relief.
What Mr. Khatami could do now, that he conspicuously failed to do when in power, is begin to erect a Reformist superstructure that will offer a viable alternative in the next election. Posted by Orrin Judd at September 13, 2006 10:08 PM
"What Mr. Khatami could do now, that he conspicuously failed to do when in power, is begin to erect a Reformist superstructure that will offer a viable alternative in the next election." If he couldn't do it then, what makes you think he can do it now?
Posted by: ic at September 14, 2006 4:46 AMAhmedinejad.
Posted by: oj at September 14, 2006 7:21 AMWhat makes you think he wants to? A speech at Harvard?
He had the implicit backing of the world community for 8 years and did nothing. Now is no different.
Posted by: jim hamlen at September 14, 2006 7:45 AMBacking of the world community? You think he takes global tests? Change in Iran comes when the Ayatollahs approve.
Posted by: oj at September 14, 2006 7:59 AMHe could have been Hu Yaobang (Hua Gou-feng, if you like), but instead he proved to be a caretaker. He smiled for Clinton, the UN, and the Euros, but that didn't count for anything.
So now he gives speeches in the West, and people still wonder - "can he be the great turbaned hope?"
No.
Posted by: jim hamlen at September 14, 2006 5:00 PMChiang only showed China the way out once he was out of China.
Posted by: oj at September 14, 2006 7:01 PMHu was the premier who was deposed in 1987 and died in the run-up to the Tiananmen massacre. He reached out to the students and was dumped by the party.
Khatami could have done the same, had he been a genuine reformer. He was 'adored' enough in the West and the UN that Khameini probably would have been unable to do anything about it. But Khatami is an Ayatollah, too. Khameini didn't (and doesn't) have a thing to worry about.
Posted by: jim hamlen at September 14, 2006 9:09 PMActually, after checking on Google, the name I wanted was Zhao Ziyang, the party chief who sided with the students during the Tiananmen crisis. He was deposed and held in house arrest until he died in 2005.
Posted by: jim hamlen at September 14, 2006 9:13 PMYou overestimate the West and underestimate the mullahs. Reform is driven by Khamenei and Khatami was his tool. He should have made better use of him. Now Khamenei needs him more because of his own foul-up last election.
Posted by: oj at September 14, 2006 9:14 PM