The US in Iran — outflanked and out of touch

by William Pomeroy

If the exploding of bombs in the undeclared US war against Iraq has an 
increasing sound of desperation as the effort to destroy the regime of 
Saddam Hussein fails, the echoes of frustration of US policy in the Middle 
East have an equal ring of despair in the case of Iran.

The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA), intended to isolate and strangle both 
of those countries, is isolating US policy-makers instead.

Iran has been a vengeful US target since the overthrow of the Shah 20 years 
ago eliminated a major US imperialist base. The overthrow was made more 
humiliating by the imprisoning of US hostages in the captured US embassy in 
Teheran for a prolonged period.

A boycott of trade with Iran was imposed, which the US sought to have 
extended to wholesale support by other western countries as well.

ILSA was adopted specifically by the US Congress to ruin the Iranian oil 
and gas industries on which Iran's economy depends, by threatening 
sanctions against any foreign company investing $20 million or more a year 
in Iran's oil or gas.

That aspect of the US policy is now in a state of rapid collapse. Also 
collapsing is the cardboard cut-out image of Iran's Islamic fundamentalist 
ruling establishment as the supporter and director of international 
terrorism against the West and as oppressively anti-democratic.

As set up under the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979 and continued under the 
present spiritual leader, Ali Khamenei, the network of very conservative 
bodies of mullahs and clerics that control the levers of power are indeed 
undemocratic.

They ruthlessly suppress left and other progressive forces, and are opposed 
by them. That opposition by the left and by imperialism, which are opposed 
to each other, complicates the struggle for change in the region.

However, inside Iran a political change is taking place. As one of the top 
five oil producing countries in the world, with nine per cent of the 
world's oil reserves and standing second in gas reserves, Iran cannot be 
pushed by US policy-makers outside the reach of oil companies that eye its 
energy riches with hopes of profit.

US companies, as well, have chafed at the restrictions of the sanctions, 
and when the Clinton administration in 1995 used ILSA to force CONOCO to 
halt plans to invest in Iran's South Pars oil field it met with opposition.

In the case of European and other international oil companies, such 
restraints have been kicked away. The European Union and the governments of 
its member states have advised their companies to ignore ILSA. France's 
TOTAL, Russia's Gazprom and Malaysia's Petronas jointly stepped in to 
replace CONOCO in South Pars.

So determined was France's confrontational attitude on the issue that in 
summer 1998 the US backed away from a battle and made TOTAL exempt from 
ILSA.

This reportedly made Mobil and Exxon — anxious to get into Iran before 
their European rivals get the fat contracts — furious.

The Iranian National Oil Company, state-owned, has fostered western oil 
company ambitions by offering 43 oil and gas investment projects.

At the beginning of March, 30 companies from 18 countries had negotiating 
teams in Teheran (one of them is Arco of Los Angeles).

On March 1, in a heavy blow to US policy, France's Elf Aquitaine and 
Italy's Eni joined in a major deal to refurbish the Doroud offshore oil 
field near Kharg Island in the Iranian section of the Gulf, a 10-year deal 
with a total value of $998 million.

This was seen as a big step in opening Iran to large-scale foreign 
investment.

At the end of January, Australia, defying US attempts to prevent trade with 
Iran, resumed high level ministerial visits to Iran with the clear aim of 
expanding bilateral trade.

Australia is especially concerned over the decline of its exports, such as 
wheat, to Asian countries due to the Asian economic crisis and is seeking 
wheat sales to Iran.

An Australian report claimed that the US had plans to sell wheat to Iran, 
which brought a US denial, of course.

The crumbling away of the US strategy of trade boycott and sanctions is an 
external development for Iran, but an internal change has brought another 
challenge to US designs.

It is occurring in an upsurge of moderate forces in the country that is 
swinging the political situation against the hard-line Islamic 
fundamentalists.

Mohammed Khatamia, a leading moderate, won the 1997 presidential election.

What was startling to both the fundamentalists and western observers was 
the nature of his victory, winning 70 per cent of a huge 90 per cent 
turnout of eligible voters, with his support coming mainly from women and 
youth.

In Iran the majority of the 63 million population is under 25, and these 
youth have no personal memory of the type of revolution led by the 
Ayatollah Khomeini, while the restrictions placed on women by the clerical 
conservatives have led to a kind of women's rebellion.

President Khatami gradually started the decentralisation of political, 
economic and social structures, away from the overall control of the 
fundamentalists, who have fought back ruthlessly.

When Khatami's moderate Interior Minister, Abdollah Nouri, removed the 
fundamentalist-appointed provincial governors and replaced them with 
moderates, Nouri was impeached and forced out; his successor, Moussari 
Lari, nevertheless continued the process.

With the approach of local elections, the first ever in Iran, conservative 
efforts to prevent a further swing to the Khatami side intensified.

In December several leading moderate intellectuals were murdered and it was 
seen as an attempt to intimidate and suppress the reformist process.

The violence backfired: the murders were traced to agents of the 
conservative-headed Ministry of Intelligence and the Intelligence Minister 
was forced to resign, a sharp setback to the conservatives.

Local elections at the end of February saw the formation of a political 
party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front, launched by 100 leading 
political figures, including a woman cabinet member of Khatami's, Zehra 
Shojir. The results were a sweeping victory for the moderate reformists, 
who won well over 60 per cent of a heavy vote.

Out of 15 seats on the Teheran council only two were taken by conservatives 
and Abdollah Nouri headed the winners.

Most impressive was the participation of women. There were between 4,000 
and 5,000 women candidates and in at least four towns, women won all the 
seats.

Next year a parliamentary election is scheduled. At present the 
conservatives have a majority in parliament, a carryover from the peak of 
fundamentalists' control.

It is estimated that the Khatami forces can maintain the moderate momentum 
and win the parliament, sharply reducing conservative power.

The Khatami-led movement is not a left movement. At best it is moderate 
bourgeois democratic development. Khatami and his allies call for 
normalising relations with the West, foreign investment and privatisation 
of the large public sector including oil.

But Khatami's declared aims of decentralising power and bringing 
participation by the people into local and higher government can bring 
unpredictable forces into play. The Iranian people will take it from there.

* * *

People's Weekly World, paper of Communist Party, USA.