Jun. 20, 2009 (WAM) -- A major UAE English daily today commented on the approach of the US President, Barack Obama, to the crisis in Iran, sparked by complaints of irregularities in this month's presidential election, as the US President refused to give enough support to the reformist camp, nor endorsed the victory claim of the incumbent president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Commenting editorially on the issue, the Sharjah-based "The Gulf Today" said: "AN INTENSE debate is raging in the US over President Barack Obama's reaction to the crisis in Iran sparked by complaints of irregularities in the presidential elections this month. Critics say that Obama has not given enough support for the reformist camp led by Mir Hossein Mousavi, who is claiming victory in the elections despite the official assertion that he lost three to one to the incumbent president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The reformist camp has been staging protests and dozens have been killed in clashes with security forces.

"Obama has stressed that universal rights of peaceful protest should be honoured in Iran, but has refused to pick sides in the showdown. "He warned that US 'meddling' in Iran's internal politics would be counterproductive, and vowed to push forward his engagement policy with Iran. "Senator John McCain, Obama's Republican rival in last year's US election, described the president's response as 'tepid,' and blasted him for abandoning the 'fundamental principles' of the United States. "What McCain would like to see is Obama pledging his support for the reformist camp and denouncing the Iranian government.

"Well, that is the perfect recipe for disaster for the reformists. Essentially, the ongoing battle in Iran is to win over the people and their allegiance. The government's description of the protesters as nothing but American intelligence agents highlights that Obama was wise not to take sides. If he had come out in support of the reformists, then it would have strengthened the regime's argument that external forces are meddling in Iran's internal affairs. It would have also offered the regime an opportunity to evoke the 1953 American-sponsored coup, which ousted a government, led by Mohammed Mossadegh and returned Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi to power.

"If the government could convince the people that the reformists as American puppets then that would be the end of all hopes for any political change in Iran. After all, the Iranians are fiercely proud of their national independence and would turn against anyone seen as implementing or helping implement an externally scripted agenda in the country. "At this point in time, Obama is wisely showing restraint but the minute he inserts himself into the situation in Iran, the minute he speaks the things that his critics wants him to speak, then his country becomes the defining force and the Iranian regime to grab the chance to blame the US for everything. And that would be a victory for the hard-liners in Iran at the expense of the reformist camp. "The demands heard in the US for an aggressive US diplomacy at this point ignores Iranian realities. It would only backfire and undermine the cause of the reformists in Iran and American interests."