Tehran doesn't trust American presidents

Since it came to power in January, the Obama administration has been trying to defuse the crisis with Iran over its nuclear programme by adopting a policy of making goodwill gestures. So far, Obama's approach has failed to produce the desired effect.

Despite its initial "positive" reaction to the new US policy, Tehran remains sceptical about the Obama administration's interest in using diplomacy to resolve the crisis. Iranian leaders believe that the change in US policy is tactical and that its key objective is to buy Washington time to further undercut Iran's influence in Iraq, Afghanistan and the rest of the Middle East before a military strike takes place. Iran also suspects that President Barack Obama might be seeking a Libya-like diplomatic victory to re-establish US hegemony in the region, which was eroded under his predecessor.

If these suspicions prove to be well-founded, Iran is very unlikely to cooperate with the US. Tehran will not allow Obama to put things in order in either Iraq or Afghanistan unless it has received credible guarantees that it will not be attacked thereafter. Iran has a history of punishing - sometimes in an unpredictable way - US presidents it suspects are trying to undermine its power.

In 1979, for example, in response to president Jimmy Carter's decision to allow the ousted Shah of Iran to receive medical treatment in the US, Iranian students stormed the US embassy in Tehran and took its diplomats hostage. Fearing that the hostage crisis might affect his chances of re-election, Carter tried to strike a deal with the new Iranian leadership. He offered to resume arms shipment to Iran in exchange for the diplomats' release. But Tehran wanted to punish Carter and his national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who had earlier pledged to support the Shah, declined the offer. Instead, they reached an understanding with Carter's rival, Ronald Reagan On January 20, 1980, the day Reagan was sworn in as president, Tehran released the US diplomats.

The desire to undermine Obama's chances of success in Iraq and Afghanistan won't be the only factor that might hinder a deal between the US and Iran, however. The Iranians claim that they were betrayed by the George W. Bush administration on two occasions. In 2001, Iran helped the US depose the Taliban government in Kabul. Since November 2001, important details have emerged about Iranian logistical support provided to the US army during the military operation in Afghanistan. Iran also helped the US set the post-war political process in motion. It participated in the national reconciliation conference in Berlin in 2002 and helped bring the pro-Iran Shiite tribes into the political process. Iran was rewarded for this by being included in Bush's "Axis of Evil" alongside Iraq and North Korea.

In 2003, Iran supported US efforts to depose another key rival, Saddam Hussain. It worked hard to ensure that the Shiite south of Iraq would not resist the invading US army. Immediately after the invasion, Iran offered the US a deal to turn over a new page in their relations. The US media reported that an Iranian peace proposal was conveyed to the Bush administration via the Swiss embassy in Tehran shortly after the invasion. In it, Iran offered to recognise the state of Israel within its 1967 borders, put pressure on Hezbollah and the Palestinian groups to moderate their stand vis-à-vis Israel and sign the additional protocols of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Bush administration rejected the Iranian offer and reprimanded the Swiss embassy, which takes care of US affairs in Iran, for passing it on.

This reaction convinced Tehran that Washington would accept nothing less than regime change in Iran. This perception remains as strong as ever in Iranian policy circles and could prove to be the decisive factor in accepting or rejecting Obama's "olive branch".

Dr Marwan Al Kabalan is a lecturer in media and international relations at the Faculty of Political Science and Media, Damascus University, Syria.