Sunday will mark 47 years since Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned to Iran after 14 years of exile.
As excited revolutionaries awaited his plane’s arrival at Tehran’s Mehrabad Airport, the country’s new supreme leader was asked by an accompanying journalist what he felt about finally coming home. “Nothing,” was Khomeini’s cryptic reply.
Today, Iran is at another pivotal moment and, unlike Khomeini’s display of detachment, feelings among the nation’s people are running high indeed. Iranian society is still reeling from the wave of repression that met anti-government protests across the country earlier this month. There are conflicting reports on deaths and detentions of the protestors. At least 5,800 people were killed, according to the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency. About 17,000 more deaths are under review as an internet shutdown continues, the agency added.
Add to this combustible mix US President Donald Trump’s warning on Wednesday that Iran faces a "far worse" attack than last year's US strikes against its nuclear sites unless it enters talks in a serious and prompt manner. The sense of tension in the region is palpable and is perhaps most easily discerned by the decision of several major airlines to suspend flights to and from the Middle East.
As the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group takes up position in the US Central Command's area of responsibility – leaving a weakened Iran within reaching distance of American firepower – there are many reasons to pursue de-escalation, the main one being that no one knows how a conflict unleashed by a new wave of strikes might end. Indeed, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted as much on Wednesday while speaking before the Senate foreign relations committee.
There are many more reasons for all parties to turn down the temperature. First, the Iranian people would suffer from war but they must also see changes that help them live better lives. Military intervention from the US would inflame government supporters and security forces who regard the protesters as being at best dupes of or at worst stooges of America and Israel. Far from helping those demonstrating over legitimate grievances, US strikes could lead to further violent crackdowns.
Furthermore, striking Iran could incite Tehran’s remaining proxy forces the region, something that would pose a particular risk in neighbouring Iraq. Pro-Iranian militias could cause serious problems for a government unsettled by threats from Mr Trump this week regarding the possible return of former prime minister Nouri Al Maliki for a third term.
Another reason to find a different way forward is the fact that there is no evidence that last year’s strikes changed any of Iran’s core foreign policy objectives. Tehran remains a committed enemy of Israel, retains its links with its remaining proxies across the region and still pursues its nuclear ambitions. In fact, International Atomic Energy Agency officials were barred from inspecting Iran’s nuclear sites as a consequence of June’s US and Israeli bombardment.
Given all this, various regional actors are urging non-military ways to change relationships with Tehran. New EU economic sanctions expected to be agreed on Thursday may prove particularly effective at a time when the Iran rial has hit a record low of 1.5 million to the US dollar. In addition, there are still channels of communication open with third parties, leaving room for de-escalation.
Were Iran’s government to make clear that it will deliver necessary internal reforms it has already hinted at would also go a long way to taking the heat out of this situation. Signalling that it is open to reaching a new deal on its nuclear programme would also help to head off a conflict that could spiral out of control.
Alarmism is unhelpful in such a fraught moment, but no one who values a peaceful and stable Middle East can afford the aloofness displayed by Khomeini all those years ago. Now is a time for focused and determined diplomacy to chart a path away from war.
