Death Of The Ayatollah : U.S. Calls Better Iran Ties Unlikely : But Administration Is Willing to Talk With New Leaders

The Bush Administration is willing to hold talks with Iran’s new leaders after the death of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, but there is little hope for any immediate improvement of relations with Tehran, U.S. officials said Sunday.

The White House issued a guarded, noncommittal reaction to the news of Khomeini’s death, reflecting what aides describe as President Bush’s pessimism on the issue: “With (Khomeini’s) passing, we hope Iran will now move toward assuming a responsible role in the international community.”

Bush refused to expand on that comment when reporters met him leaving church services Sunday morning in Kennebunkport, Me. “You’ve had a statement,” he said.

‘Not Taking Initiative’

“There is no interest anywhere in the Administration to say anything more,” a senior State Department official explained. “We would be willing to engage with the Iranians should they show any serious interest in improving relations, but we’re not going to take the initiative.”

The designation of President Ali Khamenei as Iran’s new leader may be a positive sign, he said. “Khamenei is a moderate, essentially a conservative man, who favors . . . a return to a more traditional kind of foreign policy,” he said.

“But any move toward better relations with the United States is a way down the road,” he said.

“The Iranians need to do a lot before any real improvement is possible,” he added. “They can begin with their sponsorship of terrorism. . . . The likelihood that there was some kind of linkage between the government of Iran and the bombing of Pan Am 103 has made reconciliation very difficult.”

U.S. intelligence agencies believe that elements within Iran’s Revolutionary Guard commissioned the terrorists who planted a bomb aboard that flight last Dec. 21. The 747 jet exploded in the air over Scotland, killing 270.

The United States has other problems with Iran as well: the Tehran regime’s ties to the terrorists who still hold nine American hostages in Lebanon, Khomeini’s call for the assassination of British author Salman Rushdie, and Iran’s unquenched ambitions for greater influence in the oil-rich region of the Persian Gulf.

Need for Improvement

Still, the Administration feels a need to seek better relations with the Islamic Republic, just as the Reagan and Carter administrations did, if only to counter the Soviet Union’s energetic efforts to befriend the Tehran regime.

Indeed, during the transition before his inauguration last Jan. 20, Bush and aides actively considered what they could do to seek a resumption of relations with Iran, officials said. Iran had moved last fall to reopen its ties with the West, restoring diplomatic relations with Britain, France and other countries, and some U.S. officials saw a chance for a gradual thaw.

In his inaugural address, Bush asked Iran’s help in freeing the hostages, saying pointedly: “Good will begets good will.” At a news conference a few days later, he noted: “There was a period of time when we had excellent relations with Iran, and I don’t want to think that the status quo has to go on forever.”

But those initial gestures were spurned by the Iranians. In a speech in January, Khamenei said: “In setting the conditions for the resumption of ties, the American President should know that we, not they, have conditions to set. These are our conditions: Stop being aggressive, stop your arrogant actions, discontinue the transgressions against the rights of the Iranian people. . . .”

‘Deeply Offensive’

Since then, the atmosphere has worsened. In February, Khomeini called on Muslims around the world to assassinate Rushdie, the British author of a novel viewed by many as offensive to Islam; Bush called that action “deeply offensive.” Last month, the speaker of Iran’s parliament, Hashemi Rafsanjani, was quoted as urging the assassination of five Israelis or Americans for every Palestinian killed by Israeli forces; the Bush Administration denounced that as “a policy of terrorism.” And the evidence of complicity in the Pan Am bombing by at least some elements in Iran’s government has also grown.

The Administration’s argument has been that it is up to Iran to go the extra mile--by renouncing terrorism and putting pressure on the terrorists in Lebanon to free their American captives--if it wants to improve relations with the United States.

“The ball is in their court,” one U.S. official said Sunday.

Some Iran experts outside the government suggested that the Administration should be more conciliatory toward the Tehran government to encourage Iranian leaders who would otherwise be hesitant to move toward better relations.

‘Something Positive’

“It’s time for the United States to do something positive, like say we feel the loss of their leader,” said Eric Hooglund of Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies. “That would go a great way toward helping things.”

“The problem with dealing with Iran is always related to perceptions,” he added. “Iran sees us as hostile and arrogant, which comes from their inferiority complex. They are hypersensitive to what the United States says and does.”

Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) also urged Bush to be more forthcoming. “President Bush should reiterate the call that he gave in his message at the inauguration, the open (outstretched) arm to Iran,” Lugar said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” Times staff writers James Gerstenzang, in Kennebunkport, and Robin Wright contributed to this article.