WI Iran US detente after Sep 11

Iran both public and state were appalled at the September outrages.

Had the US a different attitude (presumably a different administration) Could the two powers have worked together to overcome Al Quaede and the Taliban in Afganistan?

Might this have had internal consequences for Iran?
 
You definitely need a different American administration (either a Gore/Democratic administration or a less neocon-dominated Republican one).

You'd also have problems with hardliners within Iran as well; look at the backlash that the nuclear deal has taken from Iranian conservatives.
 

celt

Banned
I'm sure this has been debated before, but my two pence is that it is impossible with the neocons having so much influence in Bush's administration. Iran was their number one enemy after Iraq and if the 2003 invasion had turned out better, there would have been a much more aggressive American stance towards Iran. Internally for Iran we might have avoided that Israeli propaganda tool Armoured-dinner-jacket and maybe a slightly more liberal Iran that avoids the bloodshed of the abortive Green Revolution, with a less aggressive foreign policy. Although, what happens in 03 is of course the biggest thing to consider.
 

Ian_W

Banned
Iran both public and state were appalled at the September outrages.

Had the US a different attitude (presumably a different administration) Could the two powers have worked together to overcome Al Quaede and the Taliban in Afganistan?

Might this have had internal consequences for Iran?

The big issue with this is that Iran is Shi'a, and the US has a strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia, who are Sunni.

Thats your big butterfly, right there.
 
I thought there was a relative Detente under the Rafsanjani administration; it was allegations in 2002 over work at nuclear refinement facility which started of the round of recent hostility.

I don't really know why the security advisers to Bush got it in their heads that Shia Iran was sponsoring Sunni/Wahhabist AQ, but there you go. Personally I don't think W had any personal interest in Iran, though I may be wrong.
 

celt

Banned
I thought there was a relative Detente under the Rafsanjani administration; it was allegations in 2002 over work at nuclear refinement facility which started of the round of recent hostility.

I don't really know why the security advisers to Bush got it in their heads that Shia Iran was sponsoring Sunni/Wahhabist AQ, but there you go. Personally I don't think W had any personal interest in Iran, though I may be wrong.

The Iranians basically offered detente, the US government believing that Iraq would be a cakewalk turned them down. An Iraq without a Shia insurgency would have been a lot more manageable.
 
One word. Israel. No conceivable US Administration (Bush or Gore) in office during the 9/11 attacks would soften its stance much against Iran as long as Iran's stated position with regard to the Jewish State was that it should be "destroyed" and continued to assist anti-Israeli terrorist groups in Lebanon.

The US wars against Al-Qaida and related groups went south because of Bush's ill-conceived and unnecessary invasion of Iraq, not because of bad US-Iranian relations. Just because both the US and Iran each had reasons to fight Al-Qaida doesn't mean they had to have mutually friendly relations. The US invasion of Iraq made the US appear to be tacit supporters of Shia aims in Iraq, whereas the Sunnis (including many supporters of the Baath Party) were actually the group more likely to transition (under US tutelage) from a secular dictatorship to a secular "semi-democractic" US ally once Saddam and his circle was removed. Plus, as others have said, as long as Saudi Arabia remains a key US ally, Iran won't be.
 
Top