West Needs Iran in Shadow of Middle East Crisis
In an article which was recently published in World Review, Charles Millon, the French Minister of Defense during Jacques Chirac’s presidency (1995-1997) and a former French ambassador to the UN, has mentioned some interesting points with regard to Iran and the election of Dr. Rohani and the impacts that he can have on relations with the West and Europe and the Middle East which can be analyzed from different perspectives. He has written:
“Isn’t solving problems with Iran, negotiating with Hassan Rohani, the new president of this country, and making efforts to introduce a third movement which eliminates the fundamentalists and the jihadists a better strategy for France, Europe, and the US? While Dr. Rohani is preparing to accept the presidential post, the “axis of evil” can soon be transformed into the “axis of peace” and Europe and the US have an opportunity to view Iran as an ally for peace in the Middle East.”
Dr. Rohani will be inaugurated on August 3rd as the 11th president of Iran. He is a moderate and an intermediary among the principalists who is loyal to this group and the reformists. That is why he is considered as a suitable person to revive talks with the western world. He, who was Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator in the early 2000s, has stated that he intends to talk with the P5+1. The fact is that Rohani won the election in the first round and this issue has given him high legitimacy in the eyes of the principalists and the people. He must be given ample time to make a move in the direction of normalizing relations between the Iranian government and the rest of the world.
Concerns about Iran and Shiite unity in the region have caused the West, and particularly France, to put their eggs in the basket of the oil-producing Sunni countries during recent years. Perhaps now the time has come for the European diplomats to understand that the damages caused by this unity (with the Sunni countries) are more than its benefits and the mentioned countries are the source of difference and discord in the Islamic, Arab, and African world. Therefore, isn’t solving problems with Iran, negotiating with Hassan Rohani, the new president of this country, and making efforts to introduce a third movement which eliminates the fundamentalists and the jihadists a better strategy for France, Europe and the US? Although nuclear issues are permanent obstacles on the path of negotiations between Iran and the West, Dr. Rohani has put the agreement made in 2005 on the table. This agreement led to the continuation of enrichment in exchange for non-pursuance of military objectives.
Whatever Iran is accused of, this Shiite government has a softer approach towards minorities and women compared to the Wahhabi Saudis. Iran is a stable and democratic and non-authoritarian government which provides the possibility of peaceful negotiations. Alliance with Iran will help with the return of order and security to the Middle East.”
The viewpoints of this former French rightist official with regard to Iran display a new outlook among a vast number of people in the western and European countries. The former French Defense Minister has considered the strategy of the western and European countries, especially France, relying on the Arab and Sunni oil-producing countries as an incorrect strategy, whose negative results can be observed today; consequences which not only have created differences in the Middle East and North Africa, but have also had negative effects in the European countries.
The author has mentioned Shiite Iran as a third movement which eliminates the fundamentalists and the jihadists in the region which can be a better strategy for France, Europe, and the US and that Iran, with its high capacities, could even be transformed into the “axis of peace” and become an ally for peace in the Middle East alongside Europe and the US. This point shows that the western and particularly the European countries (since they are closer to the region) are fearful of the threatening and unexpected growth of the radical Salafis and Wahhabis and Takfiris in the region which are reflected in the European countries. The recent developments in Egypt and the killings in Syria, Libya … have really frightened the European countries and their citizens.
It is evident for many western politicians and sociologists that Shiite Islam is much more peaceful, flexible, and updated compared to radical, Salafi, and Takfiri Islam. Even many European officials have admitted the closeness of Shiism to Christianity compared to Sunnism. But due to the obstacles created by some movements, including the Jewish lobby and the radical forces in the US, Europe, and Israel and the conspiracies of the Sunni Arab countries, there have always been barriers on the path of Shiite Iran’s closeness to Christian Europe. Issues like Iran’s nuclear program have also led to the formation of such barriers.
Today, more than ever before, it has been revealed that placing Iran in the axis of evil, which was done during George W. Bush’s presidency and by the very radical neo-cons of the US without any accurate assessment and only to complete the list (North Korea and Iraq), was a very threatening measure and a mistake. Although the Europeans strongly protested this US move at the time, considering the issues which appeared following the coming to power of the ninth administration in Iran, this strategy caused mistrust and confusion in relations between the West , especially the European Union, and Iran for almost a decade.
Under the current circumstances, it seems that, through analyzing developments in the region in recent years, vast developments resulting from the Islamic Awakening and the Arab Spring as well as the coming to power of radical Islamic groups which frighten them, western countries are reevaluating their viewpoints and their policies towards the Middle East. In the midst of these developments, it seems that the Islamic Republic of Iran is in a very good position. Dr. Rohani's government will be able to create great capacities to initiate dialogue and constructive engagement with the European countries. Today, more than ever before, the western countries seem to be eager to exchange views with Iran. This new atmosphere should be properly used. Diplomacy and the exchange of views have an outstanding place in this new era.