Iranian Diplomacy and the Regional Developments
What is your assessment of the events taking place in the Middle East?
Strange and unprecedented developments are happening in the Middle East. I dare say that no political analyst was able to predict such a huge transformation. Who could have guessed that Mubarak’s 30 plus year dictator regime- supported by the US and Israel- would be toppled in a matter of less than a month? Who could have guessed that Ghaddafi’s regime, which dictatorially ruled Libya for 42 years, would face the situation it does today? The Arab world is undergoing a metamorphosis. The political tsunami, which is heading toward these countries, has targeted their traditional regimes and systems.
In a world where countries’ interdependence is increasing every day and taking new forms, there are rapid changes aimed at realizing a civil society as a just demand of the people. Now, the leadership of this democratic Intifada is on the shoulders of cyber space; the internet, Facebook and Twitter have created interconnected networks through which the Arab youth are following their rightful demands.
How strong do you see the role of the US, France, and Britain in triggering the people of the Middle East and its recent developments, and to what extent do you believe these events are the result and demands of the people of these countries?
I believe that these countries had no role in the initial steps of these developments. It could even be said that the pace of the developments was unpredictable for these governments. I believe that years of dictatorship and tyranny could have not ultimately ended otherwise. People who had only experienced the rule of one party or one person are now taking advantage of this opportunity to free themselves and they insist on rejecting tyranny and totalitarianism. However, it is noteworthy to mention that countries like the US, France, and Britain are taking advantage of this situation, riding on the waves of these developments, and presenting themselves as supporters of the people of these countries. These powers that were political, economic, military, and intelligence supporters of these dictator regimes in the Middle East have suddenly turned into supporters of the people.
What are the influences of these developments on oil and the global economy? How could this issue influence the West in supporting or not supporting the events in the Middle East?
Certainly oil and its influence on the global economy has a great share in the position the West takes toward the recent developments in the Middle East. I believe that one of the reasons behind the military intervention of NATO in Libya is oil. The question is, if Libya had no oil would the West still act as forcefully as it did with Ghaddafi? NATO announced a no-fly zone over Libya when Ghaddafi was taking back Benghazi in the east, and let’s not forget that Libya’s main oil resources are to the east of this country. In other words, the West did not want the eastern oil-rich part of Libya to fall into the hands of Ghaddafi again. Consider the situation in Yemen: can the massacre Ali Abdullah Saleh is committing be overlooked? If Yemen were an oil-rich country, would the West still act as it is doing? Oil and economy are one side of the coin, but the West surely considered the other side as well in its intervention in the Middle East.
What will be the impacts of these developments on Iran?
I don’t see a direct impact. 32 years ago, a massive popular revolution took place in Iran, which according to most specialists was against the dictatorship of the Shah and for Iran’s independence from foreigners, especially the US. The truth is that what is happening in the Arab world currently happened in Iran decades ago. However, I don’t want to imply that the movements in the Arab world are completely similar to Iran’s revolution. Clearly, the Arab uprisings have no leader like Iran’s revolution, which had a leader whom almost everyone followed. In addition, it is evident that the slogans Iranians used in their 1357 revolution were mostly Islamic, but the demands of most people in the Arab world are freedom from tyranny and dictatorship. People all around the Middle East now want an end to tyranny and respect for their demands and their votes.
What impact could the absence of Iranian diplomacy in the regional developments have, and what could be the best reaction in this situation?
We must support those who have been oppressed according to our religious teachings and our constitution. We have to support popular uprisings according to our national interest, and we should not get caught in double standards. While oppression against the people of Bahrain is not acceptable for us due to our religious, cultural and historical affinity with them, we cannot show a greater degree of tolerance for suppressions of people elsewhere in the Middle East. I believe that we have to emphasize the human rights aspects of these uprisings compared to other aspects. This is necessary from two perspectives. First, we have responded to the Muslim call for freedom based on our religious duty, and secondly, emphasizing the human rights aspect of these uprisings releases us from accusations spread by the US and its allies indicating that we are supporting the Shiites against the Sunnis.
How do you assess Iran’s reaction to the happenings in Bahrain, which brought about Saudi Arabia’s accusations against Iran? Do you have any criticism of the conduct of Iran’s diplomatic apparatus?
I partially responded to this in the previous question. It is no secret that Saudi Arabia is worried about Shiites coming to power in Bahrain, Shiites who could directly influence the eastern Shia areas of their country as well. Saudi Arabia’s military intervention in Bahrain is exactly due to this reason. Actually, the Saudi deployment and the violent crackdown on the Bahraini people was exacerbated when Saudi and Bahraini leaders, through their malicious propaganda, implied that Iran backed the fall of the Bahraini government and its replacement with a Shiite regime.
We have to emphasize that we respect the rights of the Bahraini people; the regime that they want to have is none of our business. I believe that our spiritual influence in the region could present us as a part of the solution instead of being part of the problem. I am not unaware of the tricks played by the US and its allies in flaming Shiite-Sunni hatred, but I also do not undermine our capacity, not only in dealing with this, but also in calming the situation and realizing Shiite rights.
Some members of the parliament such as Ruhollah Hossainian have demanded Iran’s military readiness in case of a possible Saudi military attack. Don’t you think that such statements in a situation like this only heighten the crisis?
I disagree with any movement that increases tensions. We live in this region, and we have to manage our relations with our neighbors based on a mutual respect. The crisis will end one day and Saudi Arabia will not benefit from its conduct. Moreover, we have to live with these neighboring countries. Instead of increasing tensions, we have to try to explain to countries in the region- including Saudi Arabia and Bahrain- that the Saudi military presence in Bahrain will eventually end in a loss for both countries. We have to announce our readiness in helping Saudi troops leave Bahrain.
On the other hand, we see Iran taking different positions inside the country, such its silence regarding the events in Syria, while expressing concern over some other countries like Bahrain. How can this be analyzed, and will it influence domestic public opinion?
In the previous question, I stated that we should avoid double standards. We must not imagine that our people are unaware of the news in Syria simply because we do not cover it in our media. Due to the advances in information technology, accessing the latest news anywhere in the world is not a complicated and impossible issue. Therefore, our lack of attention to the Syrian developments is not only unjustifiable in terms of the media, it will also strengthen the accusation that we have double standards with regard to the popular uprisings in the region. It is very natural for Bashar al-Assad to have opponents despite being supported by many others, and these opponents have civil rights demands. When the Syrian government announces the necessity for reform- and we only cover this aspect- there’s no justification that the philosophy behind this announcement means that popular Syrian demands be concealed from our people.