Ahmadinejad: Snubbed Politically, Diplomatically in Iran, Around the World

This is a great article from the BBC. It's one of those articles that helpfully summarizes recent events in Iran, putting lots of information into one easy to read article. I highly recommend it. Here are some points:

Ahmadinejad snubbed by the majority of Iranian Parliament: There are 290 members of Iran's Parliament (think Congress; they are elected). Ahmadinejad invited them all to a party to celebrate his re-election. Only 105 showed up. Apparently there are about 50 reformist MP's (members of Parliament), who we shouldn't be surprised about their absence. But the other 135 who didn't show up, why is that?

Well, these are popularly elected representatives, just like our Congress. If they were Congressmen, I'd say they were ditching the party for political reasons, that they were worried about alienating voters by siding with Ahmadinejad. I'd say they thought that their voter base would have wanted them to stay home. But the strange thing is, for 135 of these guys who didn't show up, their voter base is not reformist. Looks like more evidence that Stratfor is wrong to me. Looks like it's more than just a few educated youths who are against Ahmadinejad now-a-days. At least, that's what the country's MP's think, and they're in a far better position to gauge the political mood of the Iranian public than we are.

US snubs Iran diplomatically: apparently, President Obama, in an attempt to reach out to Iran, had invited Iranian diplomats to our embassies all over the world to celebrate the 4th of July. Now, some have said that this is a horrible thing for him to do. Iranians don't believe in liberty, which is what the 4th of July is supposed to celebrate. Of course, Obama has 2-3 active brain cells, so it's a safe assumption that he understands this. Rather, he was trying to put Iran in a difficult situation diplomatically. What would it have meant for Iranian diplomats to toast the founding of the US by celebrating the 4th of July with us? They'd be making a statement that they appreciate our values. Of course, he knew they wouldn't show up. But that gives the US the upper hand diplomatically down the line. "We've reached out to you...and you've rejected us."

Well, however we want to analyze what Obama had in mind, which is never easy when it comes to diplomacy, enough people cried out against the notion, and the invitation has been rescinded. Now Iran really has egg on their face. That's a very serious diplomatic slap in the face. Here's the US, trying to reach out to Iran, inviting their diplomats over for BBQ's all over the world, and then suddenly, nope, you can't come over after all. That's like severing diplomatic ties all over again. It's a very serious statement. (And one that Obama was reluctant to make.)

[Ahmadinejad responded to Obama]: "I hope you will avoid interfering in Iran's affairs and express regret in a way that the Iranian people are informed of it." [He said] Obama "made a mistake" with his comments about the crackdown in Iran. "Our question is why he fell into this trap and said things that previously Bush used to say," he was quoted by the semi-official Fars news agency as saying.

Iran expels 2 UK diplomats: and the UK responded by expelling 2 Iranian diplomats from England. This is another very big deal. Expelling diplomats usually happens when it is discovered that that particular diplomat has been spying. Sometimes, James Bond types disguise themselves as low level diplomats. When they get caught, usually they get expelled in this way (except in the cases where they get thrown into deep dark holes in the ground and get the firehose turned on them - but let's not talk about that.) So for Iran to expel 2 British diplomats is basically a proclamation of guilt: these 2 diplomats were spies trying to undermine the Iranian government. So the UK reciprocated. There are rumors that both countries are re-evaluating their diplomatic ties, that they're considering downgrading them. What this means is that they would both still maintain a diplomatic mission in the other country, but they would no longer have an ambassador. That's a very big deal. An ambassador can speak for their government. Ambassadors have authority to negotiate. When a country says that they're going to recall their ambassador, this means that they're not going to negotiate anymore. They'll still communicate, but no longer negotiate. Keep an eye out for this kind of thing in the future.

The BBC article has lots of other various tidbits of information, such as the arrest of 70 university professors after their meeting with Mousavi.

EU Diplomatic Machinations

EU vs. Iran: the diplomatic battle. Sounds like a failed videogame title, but actually, this is very significant. What's happened? The EU Presidency (currently the Czech Republic) has asked member states to "summon Iran envoys". That means they're trying to present Iran a unified diplomatic, confrontational front. This is not just a summons to have tea together, this is a summons to call them to account, to give an answer for the events in Iran.

Imagine all 26 countries in the EU recalling their ambassadors from Iran and expelling Iran's diplomats from their own countries...what has happened is the first step in that process. I'm not saying that such a process will ever reach that point, but this is a step in that direction. This is very serious for diplomacy. When a country recalls their ambassador from another country, it kind of means that the recalling country no longer recognizes the legitimacy of that country.

Of course, the US hasn't had an ambassador in Iran since 1979. So for everyone who's saying that the US stance on the current Iran crisis is inadequate, and that we should follow the European lead, well, perhaps we might rethink that.

UPDATE: From NIAC: "BBC Persian is reporting [Farsi] that Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is considering the expulsion of some European ambassadors in response to their positions on recent events. Hasan Ghashghavi, the speaker of Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Monday that the behavior and statements by these countries and appropriate actions are being examined and evaluated. Ghashghavi has accused the European countries and the United States of supporting the 'agitators' instead of inviting the people of Iran to participate in democratic processes and emphasizing the rule of law."