Keith Hudson
Last month’s Treaty between America and Iran — though yet to be confirmed by US Congress — by which Iran’s nuclear activities will be limited, seems to me to be not so much a treaty as a truce. The recent interview by . . . BBC’s Kin Ghattas and an Iranisn vice-president, Masumeh Ebtekar — she was one of the original students demonstrating against America during the hostage crisis in 1979 — was a subdued affair. A Treaty though it is said to be, it is not one of the sort of amity which one normally expects.
VP Ebtekar spoke quietly and in no way threateningly but it was very clear from the way she spoke about Israel and America that Iran regards both as still being only a little short of enemies. However, it was interesting, and I think significant that although she spoke of Iran’s support for Syria’s President Badras al=Assad, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, she didn’t include Israel’s enemy in Gaza, Hamas among them.
There are all sorts of deep implications and possible conseqeunces following from this understanding between America and Iran — particularly as regards Saudi Arabia and Isreal — but for the time being it should only be regarded as a hesitant step forwards by both sides and very much a truce rather than a treaty,
