Middle East Articles

One of the most striking features of Ambassador Javad Zarif’s critique ("Indispensable Power," Winter 2003) is that it embraces the increasingly vocal consensus in the international community about the limits and dangers of unilateralism. It is encouraging to hear a thoughtful Iranian diplomat praise global cooperation, human rights, and democracy, which Iran’s leaders scorned during the 1980s and early 1990s.

The West’s traditional suspicion of anything that could be called an Islamist movement has increased in light of recent events. In the rush to distinguish friend from foe in the Islamic world, US favor has gravitated toward the stable, secular, and overtly “friendly” regimes of the region, of which Hosni Mubarak’s Egyptian government is probably the best example. There has always been a tendency to group the moderate and radical branches of Islamist movements together, but recent developments have made it especially important to realize how much they differ.

Many in Turkey are beginning to question the wisdom of maintaining a secular state at the expense of expanding democratic freedoms and rights. The facts are undeniable: Islamic parties claim the support of an ever-increasing proportion of the electorate, their leaders hold unprecedented popular appeal, and a significant portion of the Turkish population believes that the government should adhere more closely to Islamic principles.

In recent years, the reform-minded elements within Iranian politics, led by President Mohammed Khatami, have repeatedly clashed with more conservative interests. This gives hope for improvements within the Iranian social system and better foreign relations for Iran. However, the effects on Iranian-Western relations of the recent anti-Iranian rhetoric, such as the tag "axis of evil," have yet to be seen. A cooperative position between the two countries would be in both US and Iranian interests, as it would help normalize relationships and thereby promote reform.