The good news is that the nuclear talks in Vienna between Iran and the major global powers have so far delivered quite optimistic progress. Iran has been complying with its compromise to temporarily stop nuclear activities, and in exchange, some sanctions have been lifted. The bad news is that these improvements have been dimmed by the latest diplomatic row between Iran and the United States. The US refusal to allow the new Iranian delegate into the United Nations has fanned the flames in the already contentious relationship between the two countries. While experts believe that this conflict will not obstruct the advances in the nuclear talks, it is important to consider the implications that this conflict has upon the United Nations, and the development of Iran-American relations.
About a month ago, the Iranian government announced that Ambassador Hamid Aboutalebi had been selected to be the new Iranian permanent representative at the United Nations in New York. Needless to say, this position is a crucial one in the diplomatic sphere, and considering that Iran’s delegation to the UN is the only diplomatic unit operating in the United States, the importance of this job is even more obvious.
After 30 years of experience in the foreign service, and having previously served as the Iranian ambassador to Italy, Australia, Belgium, and the European Union, Aboutalebi’s diplomatic career is quite impressive. He has even worked at the United Nations before, when in 1990s he visited New York as part of the Iranian delegation. Thus, at least judging from the 56-year-old diplomat’s professional merits, his designation to join the top international organization is not exactly shocking.
It should not have been complicated for him to get a visa either. According to the 1947 Headquarters Agreement of the United Nations, the United States is generally required to let foreign diplomats enter the organization. It is important to remember that even though the United Nations is largely considered an external entity from the United States, it is still subjected to American laws. Therefore, in order to enter the buildings, all delegates to the United Nations are required to obtain an American visa. The Iranian, Syrian and North Korean delegations have to obey American-imposed restrictions. The delegates need to conduct their lives in a 25 mile radius from Columbus Circle, as they are not allowed to go any further into American territory without special permission.
Despite these restrictions, the United States has vigorously refused to allow Aboutalebi into the country. Citing his links to the 1979-1981 American hostages crisis in Tehran, the United States has declared that Aboutalebi represents a threat to its national security, and will not allow him a visa to enter the United Nations.
The crisis refers to the infamous episode in Iranian-American relations, when 52 members of the US embassy in Tehran were held prisoners for 444 days, from 1979 to 1981. The seizure of the American embassy was a direct breach in international law, and the Shiite Islamic Law, both of which recognize the protection of diplomats.
While the shameful event has been widely condemned both within Iran and abroad, the exact involvement of Aboutalebi in the episode remains unclear. According to the Ambassador, he was not in Tehran when the embassy seizure took place, and his only connection with the hostage-takers took place when he served as a translator, in the hopes of facilitating dialogue with the international community. These declarations have been continuously corroborated by some of the activists at the time. However, deputy Ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo (Brown ’69, ’71, ‘79) reportedly stated that “it was intolerable that someone involved in depriving U.S. diplomats of protection should be given diplomatic protection in the United States”. In addition, representatives Doug Lambert and Ted Cruz have even gone so far to calling Aboutalebi a “terrorist”.
The last time that the United States had prevented a well-known political figure to enter the UN was 1998. The Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was not allowed to enter New York, and the whole Convention had to be moved to Geneva. This time, the American government has taken legal measures to ensure that Aboutalebi does not enter the United States. The typically divided American Congress united to approve a law that would prevent Aboutalebi and other “terrorist accomplices” to obtain visas for the United Nations. American President Barack Obama signed the bill on April 18, even though he has stated that the law will be “advisory”.
It is true that the United States reserves the right to deny access to people that threaten the country’s national security. It is also true that the hostage crisis in Tehran was a serious violation of international law, and its impact remains latent in Iranian-American relations. However, Aboutalebi’s complicity in the crisis is, at the very least, questionable. The fact that the vast majority of the parties recognize that he was only serving as an interpreter throughout the episode is evidence of this. Thus, his status as a “threat to American national security” is mildly perplexing, as are the restrictions placed on the man to stop him from serving as an ambassador in the United Nations. Needless to say, naming him an outright terrorist is taking it way too far.
While Iranian President Hassan Rouhani should have foreseen (and perhaps did) the problems that would arise for naming Aboutalebi as the UN representative, the reactions in the US have been quite powerful. With the new law in place, it will become easier for the US to deny visas to diplomats, if the administration ever decides to do so again.
On the other hand, regardless of whether or not it affects the nuclear talks, the episode will certainly not help the Iranian-American bonds. The conflict revolving around Aboutalebi has nurtured Iranophobia in the United States, and has revived the underlying resentments from the hostage crisis. Then again, if we must talk about unhealed wounds and unwelcome guests, we should remember that the former CIA President Richard Helms was sent as the American ambassador to Iran in 1973. This was just 20 years after the CIA itself had staged the coup in Iran. (For more information, this article is great).
Unfortunately, it seems that the Iranian-American relationship balances out in strange ways.