Azerbaijan, Baku, May 2 / Trend , D.Ibrahimova/
The United States' charges on Iran should not be considered one-sided. The United States and Iran should come to a common definition of "terrorism" to combat terrorism in the world.
"The latest United States allegations that Iran remains the most active state sponsor of terrorism should be seen in the broad strategic context between the two nations," American Expert on Terrorism Gawdat Bahgat told Trend .
Iran remains the "most active state sponsor of terrorism" in the world, a report by the US state department says. Tehran was announced key sponsor of terrorism in the world in 2008. The report speaks about Iran's role in the planning and financing of terror-related activities in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
The report identifies "Quds" - an elite unit of Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a channel through which Iran supports terrorist activities and groups abroad.
Iran has rejected the report and accused the U.S. of double standards. Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said that the United States has no right to accuse others in the light of their actions at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
The United States' recent report should be considered in a broader strategic context of relations between the two countries, experts believe. The United States' accusations are not unilateral, they encounter Iran's resistance.
"The other side of the story is that Iran denies these accusations and Tehran also accuses Washington of sponsoring terrorism," Director of the Indiana University Centre for Middle East Studies Gawdat wrote to Trend in an email.
Iran has repeatedly accused the U.S. of interfering into other countries' policies and supporting terrorism. For example, Iranian officials have repeatedly made statements that Washington is financing "Jondollah" grouping which functions in Iran and is recognized as terrorist grouping in the country.
It is also well-known in the area of international terrorism that one person's terrorist is another person's freedom-fighter, Bahgat said. The expert considers a key problem that the definition of who is a terrorist is not clear cut, rather it depends on the person's political orientation.
Exactly double understanding of terrorism hinders Iran and the U.S. to join efforts to fight terrorism. The problem is that the movement that is called terrorist by the West is considered to be resistance movement by Iran. For example, Fatah and Hamas, Iranian-American Council head Hooshang Amirahmadi told Trend .
"I think Iran and Western countries should meet to discuss what they mean by terrorism," Amirahmadi said. "They should come to an arithmetical mean in the definition of terrorism."
If cooperation between the countries will be established, Iran byusing its influence in the region can influence the situation there, experts said. Improving relations between the West and Iran will have a direct impact on the fight against terrorism around the world, Amirahmadi said. .
The fact that some al-Qaida members who fled to Iran from Afghanistan in 2001 were immediately handed over to the UN Security Council and the United States and others were arrested can be an example of successful cooperation between the United States and Iran, he said.
Regarding the possibility of Iran's rejection of terrorism, any state which is actively or passively sponsors terrorist groups do not receive benefits in the long run, U.S. expert on terrorism James Forrest said.
"Iran supreme government realizes it very well," American Combating Terrorism Center program director Forest wrote to Trend in am email.
He said it will become a more important ground than improving relations with the West for Iran to abate support for such groups. Relations between Western countries and Iran are complicated not only because of the support that Tehran is providing for terrorism, but also because of the development of nuclear program peaceful nature of which is called into question by the West and United States.
Relations between the United States and Iran were severed 30 years ago after the seizure of U.S. embassy in Tehran. Barack Obama became the first president of Iran, who talked about the possibility of contacts with Tehran without "preconditions."
As for the impact of U.S statements on relations with Iran, a new approach by Iran Obama administration to Iran will face ups and downs, experts say.
"The delicate dance or potential rapprochement between Washington and Tehran will experience accusations and counter-accusations," Bahgat said.
T. Jafarov and E. Tariverdiyeva contributed to the article.
Do you have any feedback? Contact our journalist at [email protected]