Mutual distrust is the bone of contention

The U.S. president George W. Bush, in his State of the Union address, included Iran in what he called an "axis of evil", hinting that, among other countries, it would face an attack in a future phase of the U.S. "war on terror".

The Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, blasted Bush's "unfounded allegations", saying that Bush speaks like "a man thirsty for human blood", and warned against any U.S. attack on Iran. The Arab Press discussed the escalating war of words between the two countries.

United to defend

The current American political campaign against Iran has unified the Iranian factions – including the reformist and the conservative groups – under one objective: to defend their country, writes Ghassan bin Jeddou in Al Khaleej (UAE).

This is clear from the similar statements of both reformist and conservative figures. For example, the supreme leader, Khamenei, described Bush as a person thirsty for blood, defended the Iranian revolutions slogans, and confirmed Iranian support to Palestinians.

Similarly, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami criticised the American policy, saying that it aims at "expansion" and is based on "lies", says bin Jeddou.

The Iranian leadership believes that Bush's declarations are not mere words but intentional stances that reveal a comprehensive view. Such a view aims at taking advantage of the success of the U.S. in Afghanistan to reinforce its position as the one and only superpower so as to impose American options on the whole world generally and particularly on countries - with Iran on top of the list - that do not agree with its policies, says bin Jeddou.

Tehran also believes that the U.S. is escalating its political campaign and declarations so as to hide its internal weaknesses, problems and economic crisis, especially as Bush has linked improving the economy with expanding the war on terror; in other words, if war did not resume, the economy will not improve, adds bin Jeddou.

The U.S. is annoyed with Iran's political stances as it has been supporting Palestinians, objecting to any American strike on Iraq, trying to normalise its relations with Iraq and supporting the Hezbollah in Lebanon. This is not new to Tehran.

However, the fact that the U.S. is seeking to establish a new order in the region means that it wants Iran to either accept the American options or else keep quiet, says bin Jeddou.

Moreover, this campaign has led to the defeat of the reformist faction that had earlier bet on improving U.S.-Iranian relations and on establishing close ties between the two countries, observes bin Jeddou.

In this respect, it is important for the U.S. to recognise that when it deals with President Khatami, it should forget that he is the leader of reformists because Khatami deals with the U.S. as a member of the regime and president of the state and, as such, his coordination with Khamenei is great, adds bin Jeddou.

Writing in Al Hayat (based in UK), Nahla Al Shahal says it is clear from the American statement that the U.S. wants Iran to be incapacitated and isolated so as to guarantee that Iran will not interfere in three burning issues, namely, Palestine, Iraq and Central Asia.

The U.S. wants to control the Iranian stance regarding the Palestinian cause, starting from controlling Iranian diplomatic actions to negating Iran's role in this respect. It also wants Iran to give up its desire to participate in the restructuring of Afghanistan and to forget its ambitions in Central Asia. It also wants Iran to be prepared with high immunity measures so that it won't be affected by what will happen in Iraq, clarifies Al Shahal.

Even if Iran tries to be pragmatic and rational, it cannot be like Turkey - which is an American ally. So, Iran has to stay within the set limits, starting from alienation and incapacitation to direct interference that aims at changing a regime that is classified as falling far short of the American requirements, adds Al Shahal.

However, the September 11 attacks cannot be used endlessly as an acceptable reason to re-order the world. Also, Europe, Russia and China have expressed their disapproval of recent American actions. This will lead to the prevalence of wisdom over uncontrolled and reckless power, concludes Al Shahal.

Limiting ambition

Ahmad Al Hajj writes in Akhbar Al Arab (UAE) that the U.S. is worried that Iran will have stronger military, economic and religious power, and of the progressing Iraqi-Iranian ties. It is, thus, searching for ways to limit the Iranian ambition in the Arabian Gulf and Central Asia.

Moreover, the U.S. is worried about the reforms that the Iranian government is conducting because such reforms will lead to adopting rational policies, opening the Iranian society to the West, maintaining a balance between religious beliefs and what it adopts from the Western civilisation, thereby making its society more dynamic and efficient, says Al Hajj.

This will result in Iran having a vital role in all regional issues, including the Arab-Israeli conflict. For this reason the U.S. intensified its campaign against Iran so as to tarnish its image by depicting it as a terrorist state.

Hence, the U.S. is trying to block Iran's progress on the path to reforms and trying to push it back into social isolation and religious strictness and, as such, limit the vital role Iran is playing in the region, particularly since the reformists have established balanced relations with the neighbouring countries, adds Al Hajj.

Encouraging sign

In its editorial comment, Asharq Al Awsat says there are positive indicators showing that relations between Iran and the U.S. are not heading towards confrontation. The main reason for such an encouraging sign is that the two countries have common interests in Afghanistan.

The U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell, has hinted at the positive role of Iran in the war against terrorism. And Iranian foreign minister, Kamal Kharazzi, has been positive in requesting U.S. aid to chase Al Qaida members that might have fled to Iran, clarifies Asharq Al Awsat.

There are many differences between the two countries but they are aware that they have a common interest in ridding Afghanistan of Taliban and Al Qaida, particularly since these two organisations have killed many Iranian diplomats, journalists and businessmen, as well as the Afghan Hazara group that has links with Iran.

Hence, it is debatable to say that some members of Al Qaida and Taliban are hiding in Iran, adds Asharq Al Awsat.

There might be some groups in Tehran and Washington that would like to conquer Afghanistan. Tehran had tried this in Kabul previously but failed. Hence, if the U.S. does the same, it will face the same result. It is, thus, better for the two countries to compete in building Afghanistan rather than controlling it.