Interesting events today, largely drowned out in the US
press thanks to the hue and cry over the Republican national convention.
Egyptian President Morsi was in Tehran for a meeting of the
Non-aligned Movement. This is the
first time that an Egyptian president has visited Iran since the expulsion of
the Shah in 1979. This, in and of itself, is certainly worth more than a
passing mention, but what really makes it interesting are Morsi’s comments
towards the NAM, and not so subtly towards Iran. He made a plea to the non-aligned nations of the world to support the Syrian revolution.
This is no small thing.
The fact that the Egyptian government would make such an unambiguous
statement, and do so from within Iran makes it clear that the times they are
changing. Egypt, let us remember, is the most populous nation in the Middle
East, and just a few decades ago they were the country that the rest of the
Arab world looked to for leadership and inspiration. (great piece on Nasser and the NAM over here)
Power dynamics in the Middle East have continuously shifted
since the high water mark of Nasserism - first towards Iraq and Iran, followed
by more subtle recent shifts towards Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Today Egypt flexed.
That itself would have been notable enough, but it came on
the heels of another underreported item that also took place at the NAM
meetings in Iran today: Ban Ki Moon, Secretary-General of the the UN, told supreme
leader that Iran needs to seriously revise how it talks about Israel and how it handles human rights.
Iran’s hosting of the NAM was supposed to be a bit of a
feather in their cap, but it looks to have badly backfired. (Amusing bit of mustaschadenfreude - note how badly Tom Friedman misread this whole situation)
Ayatollah Kameni has been letting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad play
the “bad cop” role for several years now, serving as a useful foil against the
bombast and bellicosity of America's previous president, but that old game
hasn't been earning Iran a whole lot of points in the Muslim world anymore, and
the only reason they haven't shifted sooner is (I believe) that the Ayatollah
himself is not an overly creative leader. He develops a plan and he sticks with
it, but he doesn't innovate.
Ultimately, the Ayatollah always plays it safe. If cutting
Bashar Assad loose seems like the best long-term solution, you can be sure that
it will happen. Maybe today's events will move that outcome little closer.
