Some who live in the United States might think Deputy Vahid Ahmadi has no understanding of the United States. However, he is a member of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee and is supposed to be knowledgeable about such matters.
In an interview with the Fars news agency last week, Vahidi propounded his argument that American politicians see talks with Iran as a winning card.
“Both the US Democratic and Republican presidential nominees know they have to raise the issue of negotiations between the US and Iran if they want to leave the other behind at the polls,” Ahmadi contended.
It wasn’t clear what kind of research he had done since Republican Mitt Romney has not been plugging for talks with Iran and President Obama faced immense criticism—even ridicule—as far back as 2007 for proposing direct talks.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast appeared to agree with the deputy. Mehman-Parast told reporters Tuesday, “The news about Iran-US talks, all coming from American sources, is mostly for domestic use in the US presidential elections. They think they can influence the results of the elections by releasing such news.”
It wasn’t clear if Ahmadi was ignorant or if he just thought he was marketing a good political point with his own voters since the argument that the Americans are salivating for talks with Iran is used constantly in Iran to show just how important Iran is in the world.
And, in fact, Ahmadi said that the frequency with which the two presidential contenders cite Iran in their speeches “signifies Iran’s influence and power.”
Ahmadi was not himself advocating talks with Washington. He emphasized, “Direct talks with the US have in no way been on Iran’s agenda. What has been raised in the Western media is a sheer lie.”
What is noteworthy in the frequent denunciations of direct talks in the Islamic Republic is the absence of any belief within the establishment that negotiations are the best way to resolve conflicts.