The Foreign Service Journal, March 2010

M A R C H 2 0 1 0 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 21 issue. It was a promise of security guarantees that led to Tehran’s will- ingness to suspend all uranium en- richment in November 2004, at the start of talks with the European Union on a permanent ban. And it was the Bush administration’s un- willingness to join in such guaran- tees that led to the breakdown of the talks and the resumption of enrichment. The language of the joint declaration that launched the negotiations was unambiguous. “A mutually acceptable agreement,” it said, would not only provide “objective guar- antees” that Iran’s nuclear program is “exclusively for peaceful purposes” but would “equally provide firm com- mitments on security issues.” In addition to security guarantees relating specifically to military issues, Iran would be likely to seek broader guar- antees in future negotiations ruling out U.S. support for overthrow of its government. The Obama administration has already sought to distance itself from the active support for “regime change” reflected in its predeces- sor’s overt democracy promotion and its covert support of disaffected ethnic minorities. Nevertheless, Iranian leaders have continued to warn against U.S. support for a “Vel- vet Revolution” amid the unrest that has followed the contested June 2009 elections. And it con- tinues to accuse the United States of supporting Kurdish separatists as well as Jundullah, a Baluch separatist move- ment. Speaking at Bijar in Iranian Kurdistan onMay 12, 2009, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared that “unfortunately, across our borders, our western borders … money, arms and organization are being used by the Amer- icans in fighting the Islamic Republic’s system.” Many jour- nalists have long reported that Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, gives arms to Pejak, an Iranian Kur- F O C U S Shared opposition to any breakup of Iraq could provide a basis for U.S.-Iranian cooperation in Baghdad.