Security pact of Iran and Arabs: A modification of Arabs’ policies
Here is an interview with Hamid Reza Dehqani Poodeh, the head of Persian Gulf and Middle East studies center in Iran’s foreign ministry.
The Saudi Prince has called for a security pact between Iran and the Persian Gulf states; which may lead to a modification of stances in regional Arab countries. Here is an interview with Hamid Reza Dehqani Poodeh, the head of Persian Gulf and Middle East studies center in Iran’s foreign ministry, on the issue.
Prince Talal bin Abdul-Aziz, a son of the Saudi kingdom’s founder and the chief representative of the Persian Gulf Arab littoral states for the UN Development organization has called for a security pact between Iran and the Persian Gulf states. Prince Talal has called for initiating negotiations between the Persian Gulf Arab states and Iran to reach a comprehensive security agreement. Such an agreement proposes non-aggression and building mutual trust between Iran and the Persian Gulf states.
Here is an interview with Hamid Reza Dehqani Poodeh, the head of Persian Gulf and Middle East studies center in Iran’s foreign ministry, on the issue.
There is a theory stating that the Persian Gulf Arab states want to engage Iran in regional and international pacts in order to decrease Iran’s moves and activities. They believe that such policy can alleviate their concerns over Iran’s activities especially in the nuclear sector. Is Saudi Prince’s call for a security pact of the same sort?
Unfortunately, the enemies of Iran have created a sense of Iranophobia in Arab countries of the region. This Iranophobia is as false and artificial as the Islamophobia in western countries. The enemies of Iran and Islam have the upper hand in the media and have exploited the media to create a sense of Islamophobia in Europe and a sense of Iranophobia in the region. But Iran has shown its real intentions in the past years and decades; so considering Iran as a threat in the region and the world is no good.
Different calls for cooperation with Iran have recently been made. One was Bahrain’s crown prince suggestion of establishing an organization with the presence of Iran and Israel which was rejected by Iran. The Saudi Prince’s call for a security pact is another one. The truth is that in the past, regional Arab countries wanted to isolate Iran in their decision makings, cooperation and organizations. But the establishment of Persian Gulf Cooperation Council without Iran’s presence and the decisions they made regardless of Iran’s interests have made them see the capabilities of Iran in the region. Now they want to engage Iran to make up for the mistakes they made in the past.
On the other hand, most of the regional pacts concluded have somehow been coercive. For example, the Baghdad pact or CENTOpactwere coercive and at the same time, their ultimate goal was not providing regional security. They were aimed at establishing a security belt against Communism. In the post-Islamic Revolution era, there were also pacts concluded which were aimed at decreasing Iran’s influence in the region.
What is the general message of Saudi Prince’s call?
He and the other regional leaders are somehow reviewing their own policies. Iran has also presented the regional countries with plans of cooperation and is pursuing the path of convergence and cooperation. The suggestion made by the Iranian president in the last meeting of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council pointing to the necessity of establishing a security organization (in which Iran, Iraq and the six Persian Gulf countries would be present), was the most important gesture Iran made in this regard. Now the suggestion made by the Saudi Prince can be interpreted as a modification of viewpoints among Arab countries.
One can not distinguish whether this change of viewpoint is emanated from the independent Arab states stances or whether it has been dictated by other countries like the US.
Iran and Arab regional countries do not have the same interests; and the Arabs’ interests are somehow defined as similar to the western countries interests. Is it not a paradox to look for a security pact in such circumstances?
In all regional organizations and pacts, the membership of one country in other pacts would somehow damage the convergence of members and would lead to divergence of interests. An organization can not commit itself to too many sides; especially because the members of an organization may have different interests and goals. This can be an obstacle on the conclusion of a security pact between Iran and the regional Arab countries.
As we have seen in the post -world war two security pacts, the US allows its European allies to act on different pacts and organizations but in a security pact like NATO, it acts comprehensively and exerts its influence. So NATO is not a European pact. It is a European-American institution.
The US is not willing to see the regional countries acting independently on the security front. But the truth is that none of the regional pacts or plans –with or without US presence- has been successful in recent years.
As you would probably remember, right after the establishment of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council in 1980s, Iraq attacked Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. It was a clear sign of the inconclusiveness of regional pacts in which one or some influential countries were absent. This historical background shows that without Iran’s presence, no regional security pact could be comprehensive.
Do you see any common points between Iraq-US security deal and the probable Iran-Arabs security pact?
The security deal of the US and Iraq is a domestic one and at the same time, it might be in advantage of neighboring countries. But if the US comes to have a positive view towards the security pact of Iran and regional Arab countries, it would be interpreted as a real change in US policies in the region. This would be a common point between Iraq-US security deal and the probable Arabs-Iran security pact.