I've been reading Martin Indyk's memoir of the Middle East peace process in the 1990s, and at one point he cites Henry Kissinger to the effect that Israel doesn't have a foreign policy; it has domestic politics. It rings true, certainly, for the last few months, and today's election will likely turn on the Israeli public's view of the Gaza conflict. It looks like Netanyahu holds a sparse lead but Tzipi Livni could pull out a win.
But Kissinger's maxim certainly applies to other states, such as Iran. Today, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad struck a relatively conciliatory note, saying that "it is clear that change should be fundamental, not tactical, and our people welcome real changes. Our nation is ready to hold talks based on mutual respect and in a fair atmosphere.” Good news, right? Except that Ahmadinejad is politically weak right now, and his biggest challenge will be coming from the reformers in the form of Mohammed Khatami, who announced yesterday that he will be throwing his hat in the ring and running in Iran's upcoming presidential elections. I'm sure Ahmadinejad's offer was just a coincidence.
Joe Klein also observes these political pressures and notes that Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani, a confidant of Supreme Leader Ali Khameini, spoke somewhat more harshly at the Munich security conference. While that doesn't make today's offer totally worthless, it does highlight the fact that Iran's domestic political situation is variable and puts pressure on the state's foreign-policy agenda, facts that U.S. decision-makers would be wise to be cognizant of as they move toward engagement. There is one sign of hope: If Ahmadinejad is concerned enough about public opinion on the issue of engagement with the U.S. to include it in his speech, it means that Iranian elites at least recognize that there is a constituency for this sort of thing.
-- Tim Fernholz
