Iran in 2009: A year of social upheaval and international defiance

West caught between a rock and hard place

While the opposition received muted support from the US and a number of European countries, Riecke believes that the West's response was nowhere as harsh as it could have been, for reasons concerning the bigger picture.

Western powers failed to act strongly after the election

"Most Westerners didn't cry foul in the wake of the election. They knew that there had to be a government in power, however legitimate, which they could deal with because of the many regional and international issues that Iran was central to; Iraq, Afghanistan, the wider Middle East," Riecke said. "They couldn't accuse and attack the government one minute and expect to negotiate with it the next."

Without a strong rebuke or action from the West, Ahmadinejad was soon resorting to type. The olive branch offered by President Obama in March was soon cast aside by the Iranian president once he was sworn in for his second term. Ahmadinejad accused the West and the United States in particular for fomenting the unrest and supporting the opposition demonstrators against him. The hand which had been offered by the US was bitten hard. As a result, the wounded hand was withdrawn.

Ahmadinejad's rejection increases nuclear pressure

Dr. Posch believes that the claim was made in the spirit of returning relations with the West to its default setting of suspicion rather than to rally the people behind the newly re-elected president.

Ahmadinejad's reelection was not well received in the West

"Ahmadinejad's claim that the West was responsible for the unrest did more damage to the relations with the West than it caused a rise in support within Iran," Posch said. "The people of Iran have become more sophisticated in their understanding and didn't really believe this so in a way it was just an antagonizing piece of rhetoric."

The knock-on effect from the disputed presidential elections was painfully evident in the relations between the West and Iran in the wake of the events of the summer. Many international leaders refused to congratulate Ahmadinejad or recognize his new government. The European Union and the United States retreated from their earlier stances of engagement and prepared their punishments.

Emboldened Iranian president squares up to opponents

The West believes Iran is seeking to develop the bomb

Events and relations took a turn for the worst in September when Ahmadinejad once again called the Holocaust "a lie" and said that Israel "has no future. Its life has come to an end." A week later, Tehran tested two long-range missiles with a range of up to 2,000 kilometers, which defense analysts have said could hit Israel and US bases in the Persian Gulf.

The missile tests came just days before the 5+1 powers - the permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany - were due to meet to discuss imposing further sanctions on Iran in a bid to halt the progress of its nuclear program.

Despite strong support for new sanctions from the US, Iran was saved from further action by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which brokered a deal under which Iran would send most of its low-enriched uranium (LEU) as of October to Russia and then France for conversion into fuel for a Tehran research reactor.

Return to default position of suspicion and distrust

Iran, which pledged to adhere to the IAEA deal while winning itself a reprieve from further sanctions, has of December yet to give any indication that it will keep to its side of the bargain. Tehran has effectively rejected the deal while not formally stating so.

Ahmadinejad is under pressure both home and abroad

"On the nuclear issue, Ahmadinejad is desperate for any victory right now to legitimize himself at home which is why the Iranians agreed to the Geneva deal in October," said Dr. Posch. "However, there are people close to the Supreme Leader who are against taking enrichment out of the country and so this is why the Iranians are now stalling on the deal."

Henning Riecke also believes that Iran's stance on the nuclear issue may have be the result of domestic influence rather than the vision of Ahmadinejad alone.

"Ahmadinejad is in a difficult position," he said. "He would like to have a stable relationship with the US so he could concentrate on domestic issues where a lot of his problems lie. But behind the scenes there are rumors of a power struggle. There are some people who want Ahmadinejad to present a harder line and who have accused him of treason for agreeing the Geneva deal. What comes out of this struggle will determine Iran's future."

Western powers have recently stressed they will not wait indefinitely for Tehran to follow through on the IAEA deal, suggesting that 2010 will begin in much the same way as 2009 - with Iran at odds with the international community and with expanded sanctions hanging over its head.

Author: Nick Amies

Editor: Rob Mudge