Obama’s message to Iranians on the Persian New Year seems to be beyond a change just in the U.S. rhetoric towards Tehran. Many in the U.S. media have misinterpreted the Iranian Supreme Leader’s response to President Obama as “rebuffing” his positive message, which is not the case. In an analysis for the Times, Roger Cohen explains the significance of such messages. I find his analysis is pretty accurate. When it comes to foreign policy Iranian authorities are pretty much pragmatic. As Cohen suggested any change in the US-Iran relations needs courage. There are countries that are not in favor of normalization of such relations. They will do whatever is needed to avoid this. But it’s in the interest of the United States to talk to Iranians and more than just talking do something real. However, the fact that the President is articulate and cute is not enough. If Obama steps forward and do something real, Iranians will respond positively. It’s even in the interest of Israelis to be more rational and never forget that a good US-Iran relations is good or them as well:

“The innovations in the president’s Persian New Year, or Nowruz, overture to Tehran were remarkable. He referred twice to “the Islamic Republic of Iran,” a formulation long shunned, and said that republic, no other, should “take its rightful place in the community of nations.” Here was explicit American acceptance of Iran’s 30-year-old clerical revolution.

He said establishing constructive ties would “not be advanced by threats,” a retreat from his own campaign position that the military option must always remain on the table. Instead he offered “mutual respect.” (Read the rest of this piece here)