US Supports Iran's Pro-democracy Movement

Guy Dinmore, The Financial Times:

A senior US official laid out the Bush administration's policy towards Iran on Thursday, pledging support for pro-democracy movements but stopping short of specifically endorsing "regime change". The official also backed European diplomatic efforts to resolve the nuclear crisis while resisting direct US engagement or providing further incentives. READ MORE

Nicholas Burns, under secretary of state for political affairs, presented the Senate foreign relations committee with a strongly worded list of demands and complaints that he described as the US "indictment" against Iran.

While there was no major shift in his exposition and the rhetoric remained tough, analysts noted that the Bush administration was not closing the door entirely on the possibility of an improvement in relations with Tehran, provided the regime acted first.

"It is our hope that US relations with Iran will change for the better. But that cannot happen without a change in Iran's policies that I have discussed," Mr Burns said.

The US "indictment" focused on Iran's "atrocious" human rights record, its support for "terrorist" groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas, its refusal to hand over detained "senior al-Qaeda leaders", its rejection of the Iranian people's democratic aspirations, its "destabilising impact" on the Middle East, and its alleged clandestine nuclear weapons programme.

Pressed repeatedly by senators about the US reluctance to engage Iran, Mr Burns had to admit to ignorance of the internal situation because of the lack of a US diplomatic presence there. He said he could not address to what extent Iranians outside the ruling theocracy supported the nation's suspected nuclear weapons programme.

The US has had no diplomatic presence in Tehran since the storming of its embassy and the seizure of its diplomats in 1979.

The senators' questioning exposed the limits on the extent of pressure the US can bring to bear on Iran. Mr Burns noted that the US was not effective inside Iran because of its lack of "feet on the ground". He added that Iran had reached out successfully in its public diplomacy to Islamic nations and was adept at undermining US efforts to build a multi-ethnic government in Iraq.

A European diplomat who follows Iran closely said Mr Burns' testimony would reinforce a widely held perception among European governments that the Bush administration has still been unable to develop a coherent policy towards Iran beyond a unilateral attempt at containment.

George Perkovich, veteran analyst at the Carnegie Endowment think-tank, told the hearing that US policy since the 1979 Islamic revolution had not worked, and needed to move beyond sanctions, hostile rhetoric and coercion. "Iran, like India in important ways, is too big, too capable, too proud, and too important for the US alone to coerce into major behaviour change. A more realistic approach is necessary," he said.

Mr Burns referred to the "Freedom Agenda" of President George W. Bush and said the US supported "those who wish to see Iran transformed from a rigid, intolerant theocracy to a modern state". But he did not say that policy was "regime change", focusing rather on change of behaviour.

Listing US efforts to "reach out to the Iranian people", Mr Burns said the state department had set up a Persian language "virtual embassy" on the internet; funded political discussions on television and radio broadcasts into Iran by Voice of America; and budgeted $3m to support "the advancement of human rights and democracy" in Iran.

Neoconservative critics of US policy have said such efforts are far too timid.

Senators focused on the nuclear issue. Chris Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, asked why the US "outsourced" its diplomacy to France, Germany and the UK in negotiating with Iran. Senator Richard Lugar, the Republican chairman, asked if offering economic incentives would be effective.

Mr Burns reiterated that the US had no intention of joining the nuclear talks, and said there was no evidence that economic persuasion would induce Iran's ruling clerics to give up their suspected nuclear weapons programme.

European diplomats are doubtful that the US would get UN Security Council support for sanctions. There is not even a solid conviction that the US and its allies would win enough support on the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog, to refer Iran to the council.

Geoffrey Kemp, a former senior official in the Reagan administration, told the hearing that the Bush administration had to be willing to negotiate "with a regime many of its policy-makers and supporters wish to get rid of altogether". He warned of the dangers of Iran "driving a wedge" between the US and Europe over the nuclear issue.