The day the US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)on Iran was released, concluding that the country - persistently stigmatised by the Bush administration - had halted the development of nuclear weaponry in 2003, I received an email.

In it, Masoud, an Iranian journalist with Al Alam news whom I met last year in Berlin, said: “I just can’t believe the US president now looks even less credible than (Iranian president) Ahmadinejad.”

I had a good laugh, and started to wonder how Bush’s cohorts and the neo-cons would drum up a case for war on Iran with their dwindling credibility following the man-made catastrophe in Iraq.

Masoud is no fan of the jingoistic president of Iran. Since we began our irregular email exchange, he has never referred to Ahmadinejad (left) as president, for he refuses to endorse the man on account of ideological differences. Being a liberal, Masoud admits to sharing more in common with Mohamad Khatami, the well-respected former president, when it comes to international issues and domestic challenges.

In Berlin, Masoud and I not only chatted about politics over bottles of beer, but also sang Beatle’s Yesterday and Don McLean’s American Pie. He had grown up in the 1970s when Iran quickly turned from western popular culture to lending support to the fanatical Ayatollah Khomeini (right), and eventually felt utterly cheated when the religious leader died in 1989.

Throughout the 1990s, Masoud had been quietly writing about liberal democracy and on several occasions expressed his rediscovered veneration for America especially when the country was under Bill Clinton, despite the chequered history of US-Iran relations over the last three decades.

But he has been finding it tumultuous to say things positive about America since the war on Iraq. The “crisis” surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme, as popularised by Bush, has only made things worse.

In fact, on Oct 28, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Mohamed ElBaradei had announced that there was no evidence that Iran was on course to producing nuclear weapons, and warned against possible military intervention. He also called for further intensive negotiations over the issue, a stance supported by both Russia and China.

More tellingly, ElBaradei confirmed that Iran had been working closely with IAEA officers by allowing them access to its nuclear facilities, and had been forthright in informing the nuclear agency of past plutonium tests.

Despite all the efforts, Tehran could not fight Washington’s vicious propaganda, and ordinary men and women who were otherwise fond of American culture and values, like Masoud, were caught in dilemma. Would it be possible for them to support neither Bush (photo) nor Ahmadinejad? In a world where religious, nationalistic and ethnic sentiments can be so easily fanned up, the two leaders were simply making hay when the sun shone. I am sure they both delighted at it.

Criticism of policy

Just when things were looking gloomy, the Iranians found an expected respite in the NIE. This aside, international consensus is also working against any military adventure.

The gathering of the five littoral states of the Caspian Sea held in Tehran in October, issued a communiqué and declared the region to be a ‘sea of peace, stability, and mutual cooperation, to serve the interests of entire littoral countries based on good neighborly ties and friendship’.

It simple language: no war should ever be waged in this part of the world. More surprisingly, even Azerbaijan, one of the closest US allies in the region, signed the communiqué and voted against resolving the issue militarily.

Masoud told me he could not emphasise enough that Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, while India, Pakistan and Israel are not. He hence fails to see why his country should be denied the access to peaceful atomic energy although he, on principle, is against nuclear development of any form.

“And I don’t think economic sanctions imposed by the US alone will be supported by most of the European countries. Their businesses are flourishing in Iran.”

I still remember Masoud’s hearty laughter at the Berlin bar.

Perhaps he can find comfort in the fact that Bush’s policy in Iran is a subject of criticism in the US Congress. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, for one, expressed serious concern about the growing tensions around the Iranian nuclear programme and possible economic sanctions, which he believes will produce grave consequences both for the US and Iran.

It is always hard to fight a battle alone. But if the Americans really hope to embrace the liberal segment of Iranian society, they must first and foremost ditch their antagonism towards the country just because its leader is seen as a bigot.

Otherwise, the US and its apologists must be prepared for global disdain in the years to come.