A change in Tehran

The task now is to tackle the sanctions issue

In the end, it was Iran's Guardian Council's own actions that frustrated their apparent ends. By disqualifying two-time Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani from running again in this year's presidential election, they cleared the deck for support from Mr Rafsanjani's faction, as well as from the other faction of moderates led by former president Mohammad Khatami, to go to a single reformist candidate: Hassan Rouhani, who had been nuclear negotiator for Tehran under both Mr Khatami and Mr Rafsanjani. And that helped Mr Rouhani win in the first round, surprising and startling many observers. Mr Rouhani took more than half the vote; his nearest competition, a former police chief and a go-getting mayor of Tehran, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, didn't cross 17 per cent. Current nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili, the candidate Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was believed to prefer, came a poor third with just over 11 per cent of the vote.

Iran's president does not have the powers that attach to equivalent elected chief executives in many non-theocratic states. The armed forces, the judiciary, intelligence and even state television report to Mr Khamenei - and the supreme leader also in effect determines the course of foreign policy. The position has often gone to a moderate, therefore, like Mr Khatami - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's aggressive presidency was something of an aberration. So, while this is undoubtedly a strong signal from Iran's people to their clerical leaders that hardline positions are relatively unpopular at the moment, the effect on policy is unlikely to be immediate. Yet the importance of this election should not be underestimated. First, it demonstrates again that Iran, whatever the illiberal restrictions on its democracy, nevertheless is a well-functioning and complex participative state - making it more difficult to stereotype it as a monolithic member of former US President George W Bush's Axis of Evil. Second, the replacement of Mr Ahmadinejad with someone who is, first, known to the international diplomatic community and, second, has often argued for concessions to the West makes it near-impossible for the US and Israel to continue to claim that Iran is going rogue on nuclear issues. Mr Rouhani has served 16 years on Iran's national security council, and is independent enough to have stated in an interview during the campaign that the US had offered talks on the nuclear issue, which Mr Khamenei had vetoed. Sanctions are beginning to bite: Iran is likely more ready to talk now.

Clearly, whether or not Israel's belligerent leadership is ready for it, the Obama administration in Washington must lead efforts to restore normalcy to Iran's relationship with the world. Sanctions cannot be a permanent solution to the problem of Iran's nuclear programme; an answer must be found that respects Iran's sovereignty and its national pride while maintaining West Asian stability. Indeed, the focus must be on taking this opportunity to find out how sanctions can be rolled back. India cannot be a bystander in this process, either; as a close trading partner with Iran, and one forced to cut back on crude oil imports under US pressure, it has big stakes in seeking a solution.