US: Just how far the United States should go in supporting the pro-democracy protests in Iran has become the subject of intense debate within the Bush administration following this week's demonstrations in Tehran, writes ConorO'Clery in New York
Washington has given moral support to the reform movement in Iran, but yesterday US President George Bush expressed more direct vocal support for the student demonstrators, despite misgivings by some officials that this could be counterproductive.
"This is the beginning of people expressing themselves toward a free Iran, which I think is positive," Mr Bush said. "I think that freedom is a powerful incentive. I believe that some day freedom will prevail everywhere because freedom is a powerful drive."
Mr Bush's comments were made after a church services at Kennebunkport, Maine, where he is spending a weekend with his parents. They followed a White House statement on Saturday which denounced Islamic hard-liners who attacked the demonstrators and calling on the government to release those who have been jailed. Iran's Foreign Ministry accused the United States of "flagrant interference in Iran's internal affairs" and of overstating the significance of the protests.
An internal debate on what could become the next big foreign policy crisis for the United States is raging in Washington. In the past, the State Department has put the emphasis on opening a dialogue with reformist elements in the Iranian leadership. This has now been abandoned.
In the US Congress, support is growing for a US role that would go beyond giving moral support to reformers trying to end the rule of the religious leaders.
In May, Republican Senator Sam Brownback proposed an amendment called the Iran Democracy Act that would funnel $50 million to exile Iranian efforts such as the Farsi-language satellite NITV station.
NITV, based in Los Angeles, has been calling this week for residents of Tehran to join the demonstrations. Run by an exiled Iranian human rights activist, NITV supports a return of the monarchy and claims to reach seven million people in Iran. The Brownback bill is supported by conservative groups such as the Christian Coalition but opposed by the leadership of the Foreign Relations Committee, reflecting the sharp debate on policy towards Iran.
The Bush administration has also avoided taking a position on the initiative of Senator Brownback, who has accused Iran of harbouring al-Qaeda operatives and dismissed Iran's President Khatami as a "pseudo-reformer".
Mr James Woolsley, a former CIA chief, and other neoconservative intellectuals have come together in recent weeks to form the Coalition for Democracy in Iran.
It has ties to the exiled Reza Pahlavi, son of the former Shah of Iran who was installed as the country's ruler in a CIA-inspired coup in 1953.
This group is promoting a more aggressive White House policy on Iran and aims to foment a pro-democracy revolution.
Mr Bush included Iran along with Iraq and North Korea in his "axis of evil" speech last year and the US has accused Tehran of secretly aiming to develop nuclear weapons within three years.
A strategy for US policy on Iran was drafted in the early days of the Bush presidency in 2001 and is said to have gone through several revisions but has not yet been completed, leaving the White House without a coherent position.
The recent bomb attacks in Saudi Arabia gave impetus to proponents of regime change who argued that an Iran-based al -Qaeda group might be responsible.
The Bush administration's attempt to mobilise international opinion against Tehran has had some success. Russia has spoken of cutting off assistance for its nuclear programme and the International Atomic Energy Agency has criticised Iran for failing to report the processing of nuclear materials.