Iran: A Renewed Washington Love Affair With The Green Movement?

It is striking that, after six weeks in the high-profile US media of scepticism and even hostility towards the Iranian opposition, there appears to be another honeymoon of American sentiment for the Green Wave(s). While the protests of 13 Aban (4 November) were largely put aside by the US press, the smaller demonstrations of 16 Azar have been embraced as the valiant defiance of Government oppression.

The Christian Science Monitor saw the resurrection of "the country's Green Movement , [which] has found new ways of organizing and keeping its message alive", and Los Angeles Times published a lengthy editorial, "Help Iran's Student Protestors":

The students, for their part, seem to be girding for a long fight, and the West should follow their lead. Western governments should offer the reform movement moral support, as President Obama did in his Nobel Peace Prize speech, promising to be a voice for the aspirations of reformers such as the "hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran." But the West also must be careful not to undermine the reformists with too close an embrace. This is a national movement, and the Iranians who are questioning the legitimacy of their own government are diligent students of their revolutionary forefathers.

The Latest from Iran (11 December): Ripples and then Ruptures?

Meanwhile, CNN has converted a general statement from Assistant Secretary of State John Limbert, ""We believe as we have always believed that the Iranian people deserve decent treatment from their government," into a portrayal of Washington's renewed backing of the opposition with the headline, "Official: U.S. Will Not Ignore Iran Protests".

President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech offered a high-profile stage for a display of Washington's sentiments. Masoud at The Newest Deal came away with hope:

One of the two times Obama explicitly singled out Iran was on the nuclear issue, if only to stress the importance of countries to not only follow international law – in this instance, the Non-Proliferation Treaty – but to also ensure that such international agreements are followed and respected by all nations. Obama continued:

"The same principle applies to those who violate international laws by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo, repression in Burma -- there must be consequences. Yes, there will be engagement; yes, there will be diplomacy -- but there must be consequences when those things fail. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression."

What is interesting to note is that while Obama did not mention Iran in his litany of countries that “brutalize their own people,” he used the word "engagement" in his very next sentence. The term “engagement,” of course, has been used almost exclusively vis-à-vis Iranian diplomacy during the first eleven months of the Obama administration. It appears that this was subtle (if not coy) way of putting the Iranian regime on notice.

On closer examination, however, it appears that the Obama Administration is still driven by a nuclear-first attitude on Iran. The substantial statements on Thursday and today have all been about sanctions on Tehran: US, British, and French ambassadors at the United Nations warned of Iran's violations of arms embargoes. The French ambassador asserted:

If Iran continues to do everything it can to violate five Security Council resolutions, if it continues to refuse the slightest confidence measures, to refuse dialogue, transparency after the major revelations that have just been made, we must draw all of the necessary conclusions and that means we must move on to a new resolution involving sanctions.

US Ambassador Susan Rice echoed, "Should Iran continue to fail to meet its obligations, the international community will have to consider further actions," and this morning Secretary of Defense Robert Gates piled on the rhetorical pressure, "I think you're going to see some significant additional sanctions imposed by the international community, assuming that the Iranians don't change course and agree to do the things they signed up to do at the beginning of October."

So, however warm the renewed affection for the Iranian opposition, it stills appears that "plucky student protestors" translates into no more than pawns in the Obama Administration's nuclear chess match with Tehran.