Last Tuesday, the American people elected their 45th president. Although opinion polls suggested a close race, at the end of the day incumbent Barack Obama won the election by a comfortable margin, if not a landslide. As expected, domestic issues dominated the 2012 presidential campaign: issues such as the state of the economy, unemployment, inflation, immigration, and health care. While these issues were given the highest priority by most Americans, foreign policy issues, particularly those related to threats to American interests worldwide were also on the minds of many Americans as they cast their votes.

Now that the election is over, the question for the people of the world is how the second Obama presidency will look as far as US foreign policy is concerned. Obama's foreign policy during his first four years is characterized by both successes and failures. Obama's decision to move away from unilateralism in international affairs—promoted by the Bush Administration—and his difference of opinion with neoconservatives who view the global security crisis through an idealogical lens, gave him the opportunity to create a new atmosphere in international relations. Furthermore, Obama's appreciation of the need for Islam and the West to interact was another indication that he wanted to open a new chapter in relations between the US and the world of Islam.

However, in actual terms and for different reasons, Obama was not successful in implementing all of his ideas. For instance, his more or less balanced approach towards the Palestinian problem at the beginning of his presidency was confronted with Israeli intransigence, leading to an uneasy personal relationship with Prime Minister Netanyahu. US-Israeli relations at other levels were also not as friendly as before. For example, one can point to what Joe Biden, the US Vice-President, endured during his visit to Israel in the early months of the Obama Administration when he was openly humiliated by the usurping regime's officials.

Obama's Iran policy during his first term in office can be divided into two parts. At the beginning, he talked about his intention to open a new page in relations with Iran. On the occasion of the Iranian New Year in March 2009, Obama praised Iranian civilization and attempted to reach out to the Iranian people by saying that the U.S. was prepared to end years of strained relations.

While Obama's tone was conciliatory, he was not prepared to take concrete steps to show that his deeds would match his words. On the contrary, he continued with the hostile US policy towards Iran by enacting new regulations, including those related to tightening sanctions against Iran. On the international level, American diplomats spearheaded a campaign to adopt sanctions resolutions at the United Nations. The US was instrumental in scuttling an agreement in 2010 among Iran, Brazil and Turkey for the shipment of Iranian (20 percent enriched) uranium to Turkey, a move that if supported by the Security Council, would have been a milestone in resolving the nuclear file. Instead of endorsing that agreement, the US and its European allies rushed to the Security Council and adopted resolution 1929, the most comprehensive internationally-approved sanctions against Iran to date. Moreover, the US has continually forced other countries to apply unilateral sanctions on Iran, threatening them with financial penalties if they refuse.

With the US election behind him, Obama is said to be considering extending a hand to Iran again. If true, that would be a promising development; provided that this time practical steps proving his goodwill are also taken. Undoubtedly, Iran and the US need to engage in negotiations in order to resolve their differences, as the P5+1 process has so far produced no tangible results. A new US overture would also provide a more positive atmosphere for the P5+1 talks to bear fruit. The Supreme Leader, who directs all important domestic and foreign policies of the Islamic Republic, has always emphasized the need for any negotiations to be based on equal footing and on goodwill. The aim of negotiations should be to ultimately resolve all outstanding issues through a grand bargain. There is simply no other way left for the two parties to resolve the crisis other than to start real negotiations, and in good faith.