During the U.S. presidential elections, Barack Obama was subjected to a fierce campaign accusing him of being inexperienced, a novice at foreign policy. While the criticisms from his rival Hillary Clinton at the time were expected and understandable, the majority of those who criticized his lack of knowledge in foreign policy matters were supporters of Israel, especially the Jewish lobby. Moreover, when Obama visited Europe for the first time as President and attended the G20 summit, there were whispers that he refused to lead the group or the Western bloc, and again because of his lack of experience. President Obama addressed the Muslims from Cairo, and his speech was historical in its content. It was credit enough for him that the listeners at the University of Cairo chanted his name, and said that they loved him, while George W. Bush's last foreign visit ended with an Iraqi journalist throwing his shoes at him. Meanwhile, the Iranian elections took place and spurred a controversy between those who won and those who were defeated, and then demonstrators took to the streets either in protest at or in support for the results. The whole outside world showed its support for the reformist candidate, Hussein Moussavi: Liberals considered him as one of them, while the neoconservatives and the same evil gang preferred him to his rival because they are against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his defiant attitude and speeches. Meanwhile, President Obama said that he was deeply troubled by the violence that has accompanied the demonstrations, and called for respecting the right of people to peacefully express their dissent. It is his caution that made him only show his concern and disturbance about an issue that arose all of a sudden, for him to take his time to think and take a sturdier stance on the issue later on, without having ruined his future options by saying things he might regret. Meanwhile, Sen. John McCain, who suffered a resounding defeat in the U.S. presidential elections at the hands of Barack Obama, attacked the President's position on Iran, asking him to declare that the Iranian elections were corrupt and flawed. I will not ask how McCain learned this information all the way from Arizona. It is clear that he is just trying to score points against the man who defeated him. Nevertheless, the few words that Obama chose to say about the Iranian issue proved that he is smarter than all those who surround him, and smarter than his Republican opponents and perhaps even smarter than the big names in the Western Press who almost convinced themselves, and me along with them, that we are dealing with a confrontation similar to Beijing's Tiananmen Square's. In an interview with «CNBC» and the «New York Times» this week, President Obama quietly said some few simple words which deserve the attention of those concerned with Iranian affairs. He said that the difference between Ahmadinejad and Moussavi was not big as promoted. In all the articles I had written about the election in Iran, I criticized the naive talk about who is radical and who is a moderate or a reformist, and I talked about Moussavi's track record as prime minister in the eighties. I also went back to Karroubi's presidency and the Iranian pilgrimage convoy to Saudi Arabia in 1985. I also reminded everyone that the Iranian nuclear program continued during the terms of both Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami, as it did before that and would continue afterwards. It is not that President Obama expressed an opinion similar to mine, because he certainly did not read what I wrote. He probably arrived to his conclusions through carefully studying the situation and through pure common sense, hence the violent campaign against him in the Israeli press. All that matters to the world when it comes to Iran - at the instigation of Israel - is its nuclear program, which is unanimously approved by all Iranians, both governing and governed. As such, the words radical and reformist only make sense in view of some personal and media freedoms for activists, intellectuals and progressive women in Tehran and some other big cities, with all of these representing less than ten percent of the Iranian people. Obama also said that there will a counter-productive effect should the United States appear to be meddling in Iran's internal affairs, which are also words that are one hundred percent wise and sound. However, this does not suit Israel and the American Likudniks who want the U.S to wage war against a country that does not threaten it now, nor will it in a thousand years. In all cases, the problem in Iran is likely to be resolved by the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei in his speech today concerning the results of the elections, and independently of any outside interference. Prior to Obama's recent statements which proved to me that he knows what he wants and that he will not be deceived, he took an important decision of moving Dennis Ross to the National Security Council as the responsible for Iranian affairs, instead of appointing him as an envoy to Iran like George Mitchell to the Palestinians and Israel, and Richard Holbrooke to Afghanistan and Iran. Ross was the most Likudnik member of the Clinton administration, and after he left his post there, he became the Head of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy founded by Martin Indyk for the sole purpose of supporting and defending Israel, while other members such as Daniel Kurtzer and Aaron Miller kept their liberal tendencies in their subsequent posts outside of the administration. I believe that Obama's administration will serve U.S interests alone in its policy toward Iran, rather than the interests of Israel, and this is enough.
