Roadsigns On the New Autobahn To and From Tehran

That autobahn to Tehran has been inaugurated. Not only through mountains of hurdles. But also through other higher cliffs of enmity. Primarily between Washington and Tehran. This enmity between the two had its first roots in the CIA. Acting as a parallel US government, the CIA was instrumental in toppling the Iranian popular democratic regime of Muhammad Mossadeq in 1953. Brought the Shah back from Rome to rule with a westernized but iron fist.

The cause of that outside intervention was one: oil. The Anglo-Iranian oil company was nationalized. After the Shah was sacked in 1979, America to Iran became "the Great Satan." And Iran, with Ruhollah Khomeini heading an Islamic Republic became to Washington a "state supporting terrorism."

The gulf between the two was so poisonous, that it hardened into a creed. So for nearly four decades, punctuated in the 1980's by Saddam attacking Iran with US and Arab support, Iran was made an outcast.

But the international wheel of fortune never stops turning. Khomeini failed to export his austere form of Shia papacy to the Gulf. He assumed the title of "Imam," while converting the Shia scholars (ulama) into a ruling class. The cleavage created between the ulama of Karbala, Iraq, and some of the ulama of Qom, Iran, became greater.

And in 1981 the Khomeini brand of Shiism further alienated the demographically largest Arab State, Egypt. Egypt whose capital, Cairo, and its historic citadel of Islamic learning, Al-Azhar, were built by Shiis. That was more than 1000 years ago when the Fatimidis ruled supreme. Before they were replaced by Saladin -a Kurd and a Sunni.

Yet "the conversion" of Egypt to Sunnism has remained formalistic. Egyptian reverence for the House of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Bait) is a shared quality between historic Persia and historic Egypt. Two States, going back into history for thousands of years, could not be easily alienated from one another.

But Khomeini gave that historic bridge a shock. Upon Sadat's assassination, Tehran named one of its main thoroughfares after his assassin. Sadat had granted the Shah asylum, and concluded a peace treaty with Israel in 1979. The rift fossilized.

Now fast forward to the new Iran. With the moderate President Hassan Rouhani, and the new Egypt, with the pragmatic President El-Sisi. Sanctions were imposed on Iran by both the the US and the UN for its nuclear portfolio. But Egypt has never been in favor of sanctions. Except for those imposed on apartheid South Africa. Even during the Libya of Qaddafi, Egypt led the charge, choreographed by Nabil El-Arabi at the UN Security Council, for lifting those sanctions. Egypt, upon signing its peace treaty with Israel, had the bitter taste of regional isolation.

But reformers, like Rouhani, read the pulse of his nation as desirous to rejoin the international community. In US-educated Jawad Zarif as foreign minister, Rouhani found a superb negotiator. "Get us out of sanctions, and in with the world." So the decision was made to allay international fears from the perception of an Iran armed with an atom bomb.

Over more than two years, negotiations between Tehran and the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany proceeded along a bumpy road of reaching an accord on the nuclear file. In July 2015, the energy of diplomacy, unleashed, won the day. The sword of demagoguery, unsheathed, was blunted.

And by late January 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency testified that Iran has carried out its side of that historic bargain. Even before that awaited certification was made public, non-American business representatives were descending upon Tehran to be signed up. The autobahn to Tehran was now agog with international traffic.

But the season of disruption was not yet over. Sheikh Al-Nimr, a Saudi Shii leader was judicially, but injudiciously, executed. Incensed, the Tehran mobs attacked the Saudi Embassy in Tehran.

That attack on those diplomatically-protected premises, was condemned by Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran's highest leader. He was joined by Mohammad Javad Zarif who lamented: "This was an act that we were not proud of... I think our Saudi neighbors need to realize that confrontation is in the interest of nobody."

But the shrill voices of confrontation were not to be easily stifled. Especially in America. That is where the Republican Party keeps on emitting the piercing sounds of hostility toward Tehran. Their voice was amplified by Foreign Affairs of January-February 2016. "Time to Get Tough on Iran," shrieked the title of a pugnacious article by Eliot Cohen, Eric Edelman, and Ray Takeyh.

Their thesis is that "the Islamic Republic is not a conventional State making pragmatic estimates of its national interests, but a revolutionary regime." The shrill then gets louder. "Iran is an exceptionally dangerous State -to its neighbors, to close US allies such as Israel, and to the broader stability of the Middle East." And: "The agreement recognizes Iran's right to enrich uranium and eventually to industralize that capacity."

Well, Iran does not require an international agreement to recognize its sovereign right to enrich uranium under IAEA guidelines. It is also a State which has now proved its pragmatism by demonstrating its readiness to rejoin the world community.

In regard to its Arab neighbors, the Syrian issue for Iran, cannot be framed only in a Shii vs. Sunni context. Regime change by outside intervention is anathema to Iran. Since 1953, it had a bitter taste to that proud nation.

This was plainly manifest in its tough stands during negotiations on its nuclear file. The result was a win-win result for all parties. Even American critics of Iran such as Nicholas Burns, a US former under-secretary of State, saw in it a historic shift. He described it as "a potential turning point in the modern history of the Middle East." In his op ed page in the New York Times of January 19, he also interjected: "But Iran remains a powerful adversary of America across nearly all the conflicts of the Middle East."

True, though reflecting a sweeping conclusion. Belied by the present negotiations on a political exit from the Syrian quagmire. Such an exit cannot be found without the cooperation of Tehran and Moscow.

Unfortunately, the language of Nicholas Burns is mirrored by the language about Iran used by Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister. In the New York Times of January 20, 2016, Adel Al-Jubeir vehemently asserted that "The world is watching Iran for signs of change, hoping it will evolve from a rogue revolutionary State into a respectable member of the international community." 

On various levels, that is utterly wrong:

• Within Iran there is more give and take between the rulers and the ruled than in Saudi Arabia;
• His claim that Iran "helps the Islamic State flourish" is patently bogus;
• So is his reliance on "We are not the country designated a State sponsor of terrorism. Iran is." Mr. Al-Jubeir should be aware of the politicization of such designations, and the reasons for selectively applying them;
• It is in the nature of exercising national sovereignty for Al-Jubeir to warn: "Saudi Arabia will not allow Iran to undermine our security or the security of our allies." In the context of sovereign equality, the same argument should also be marshaled by Iran.

The fact remains that both Riyadh and Tehran are engaged in an unseemly ideological battle world-wide. Riyadh supports Sunnism; and Tehran supports Shiism.

Petrowealth has been liberally employed by the two antagonistic capitals in the illiberal cause of splitting Islam in two genres. A fiction that has no Islamic jurisprudential basis whatsoever. There is no Sunni Islam, nor Shii Islam.

However, within this seemingly endless battle for the soul of Islam, one finds roots of that ailment: the super imposition by both capitals of their brand of Islam on the affairs of State. Reason why Al-Azhar's position should be applauded as it declares that "Islam does not recognize a State based solely on religion."

One of the many problems with faith and State in the Arab and Muslim worlds is the absence of analytical reasoning. An ignorance that leads to direct copying from others without due scrutiny. This is a black hole that is exemplified by an article in Arabic in Al-Ahram, the official newspaper of Egypt. Hani Imarah, an op ed page writer, states in it without evidence that "Iran, like cancer, has expanded for tens of years in the Arab body." Where? When? He does not say.

This is imagination born of ignorance. As such, impossible to prove. Unless relying upon unofficial Iranian hot air talk about controlling Arab capitals. The New Egypt deserves better media. Egypt, by its culture and civilization, should immerse itself in repairing the gulf between Iran and the western shores of the Gulf.

Obviously, Iran could not be comfortable with decades of cooperation between the intelligence services of Riyadh and Washington, D.C. That relationship heightens Tehran's mistrust of both. Even after blessing the Iran nuclear deal, the Iranian supreme leader warned against placing trust in America. It was a message which can only be read in Riyadh as also aiming at the Kingdom. The friend of my enemy is my enemy.

A restored Cairo/Tehran entente would be the most suitable vehicle for that political and religious reconciliation. My present research for a book in English on the Sunni-Shii rift finds no evidence of an Islamic religious foundation for that fiction.

And as we speed along the autobahn to Tehran, let us forget about a non-substantiated fatwa by the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia. He recently declared that "chess is the work of Satan." On what basis did that gentleman anchor his fatwa? The Quran refers to "Satan's handiwork" in the context of "intoxicants and gambling and idol worship and fortune telling" (Chapter V/90). None of the above applies to chess.

A fatwa is only a non-binding opinion on a matter of religion. Sheikh Al-Sheikh, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia: Your fatwa doesn't advance the cause of Islam. A faith that values science and ijtihad (application of common sense to the text). Your fatwa can only contribute to Islamophobia. As does your banning of dance, music and gender equality.

Chess is a cerebral game of strategy and mental agility. Originally developed in Persia. The grand civilization which has hugely contributed to Islam through emphasis on science, math, and technology. Iran's nuclear advances are a natural by-product.

The New York Times of January 29, 2016 states:

"Despite lingering animosities and the United States' designation of Iran as a sponsor of terrorist groups, European governments and corporations have made it clear that economic opportunity is going to trump concerns over human rights, security and politics for now."

Tehran is now bringing in the Airbus manufacturer to deliver 118 of new aircraft. President Rouhani is consorting not only with Italian and French leaders but also with Pope Francis. A very welcome dividend of peace secured through the dignity of equality of sovereignty between nations. Another cold war seems to be coming to an end.