Are we heading towards a new conflict?

After a lengthy delay, the next nuclear discussion meeting between Iran and the 5+1 countries (the US, the UK, France, China, Russia plus Germany) is scheduled for December 02. Before that, I would like to draw some attentions to some existing discrepancies.

After the rigged presidential election last year, the legitimacy of the president Ahmadi Nejad's government has been stripped off by the Iranian people. Tens of millions of whom, world was witnessing, on streets of Iranian cities chanting against Ahmadi Nejad and the Islamic establishment. Now, a representative coming from Iran to represent the country has no mandate from the people of Iran. He would then be only capable of representing an illegitimate government. He should therefore be received as such only. He comes in his capacity as representative of Ali Khamenei - the Supreme Leader - Ahmadi Nejad and a small number of military and security people who orchestrated the election coup last year. These are the people whom committed enormous crimes against Iranians since then; and international and human rights law would define them as criminals against humanity. Iranians do not recognise the government runs by these people. The US has also recently signaled that "changes in circumstances" have affected any future negotiation; which probably should be interpreted as of meaning of the foresaid.

Furhermore and as a matter of fact, the very legitimacy of the Islamic regime itself with Ali Khamenei, as Wali Faghih or the Supreme Leader, has been undermined by the majority of people. And the legitimacy of this regime will never be restored unless the regime agrees to hold a referendum under a UN's mandate asking the Iranian people if they want such theocratic regime in Tehran. The chance of regime entertains such a demand is zero; simply because it knows better than anyone else that it has no legitimacy whatsoever. It knows very well that as soon as it removes the lancet from the people's throat; there wouldn't be an Islamic regime in existence anymore. This view is supported by the fact that close to 70+% of the Iran's current 70 millions population are under 35 years of age. This corresponds to more than 49 millions of the country's population whom had not been born, or must have had been under age of 5 years, at the time of so-called revolution in 1979. Notably this huge chunk of the population have got nothing to do with the establishment of the current Islamic regime except being oppressed by it. These people mostly formed those millions on streets of Iranian cities last year protesting against Ali Khameneei, the Supreme Leader, and the very existence of the Islamic regime. Iran belongs to them; they are the true owners of the country. And they did not vote for Ahmadi Nejad.

Considering the view point of the 5+1 countries at the coming up meeting, it would be imprudent by any standard to ignore these numbers; and think such an unstable government is capable of holding any meaningful negotiation on behalf of these people and their country. Nonetheless, according to signals already received from the world community since the election, I tend to believe that the 5+1 heeds the same view, though it ostensibly negotiates with this government. It has visibly avoided actions which inimically affect the interests of the Iranian people. I trust the new sanctions measured against the regime have been designed to serve that goal too.

At the negotiating table the 5+1 is facing some serious questions. Questions are included but not limited to: what an illegitimate government of Ahmadi Nejad has or is indeed able to offer without the support of its people? How stable such a government or regime are? How much can we bet on an old horse? Can we afford to be complacent in light of their active pursue of nuclear device?

All in all, an illegitimate government or its regime can not give what they don't have. The guarantee and authority lie with the people of Iran.