فارسی

 

INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AND IRAN

“International Peace Academy (IPA)”, the New York based think-tank carrying out studies on topics in the agenda of the United Nations, handles a current issue that has been keeping the international community intensively busy, in the framework of the annual “West Point Seminar”, in an interactive academic exercise environment attended by analysts/experts and participating diplomats. The subject of the IPA’s seminar for this year, carried out in accordance with the “Chatham House Rules”, has been determined as “The Middle East in the Global Agenda: Themes, Trends and Connections”.

The IPA’s seminar for this year, held on May 01-04, 2006 and chaired by Terje Rod-Larsen, the special envoy of the United Nations Secretary General to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1550 (2004) on Lebanon, was attended by around 50 diplomats, mostly the representatives of countries accredited to the UN. During the four day seminar, in addition to the presentations of analysts/experts handling the diverse aspects of issues regarding the Middle East, working groups have been established on Palestine-Israel, Syria-Lebanon, Iraq and Iran, and an atmosphere has been created to exchange diverse perspectives on actual developments/problems.

 

 

 

“The Palestine-Israel conflict, that has constituted the basis for the Middle East issue for decades cannot be regarded as the epicenter of the regional instability anymore. In addition to the prioritized position of the Palestine-Israel conflict, in its evolution, in the solution of the Middle East issue, particularly in the current conjuncture following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the developments regarding Iraq, Syria-Lebanon and Iran have turned into centers of instability that could influence international politics on regional and global levels. Thus, four points of conflict/potential dispute have evolved in the Middle East. The problems in the Middle East have turned into a bundle of more complex problems, directly or indirectly interconnected. Furthermore, in the developments in communication and media, and the political, security and socio-economic fields, these problems further deepened by the polarization along the axis between Islam and the West, have reached to a level that could influence not only the regional people but also the diverse strata of all Muslim countries. Therefore, so as to solve the regional issues, diversifications/contributions are needed that would enable multi-pronged solution strategies in the assessments that would be made,” underlined IPA Chairman Larsen, in his opening remarks as part of a general assessment on the Middle East.

During the seminar, the developments regarding Iran has been handled under three different topics, namely a) the nuclear program, b) Iran’s position in the region, and c) the internal situation in Iran. During the seminar, it was emphasized that a long-term vision is needed to solve this problem that is encountered both on regional and international levels regarding the nuclear program of Iran. The current crisis has been managed through short term tactics. In this process, Iran maintains its position as “the powerful party that determines the course of the crisis”. Furthermore, Iran has carefully studied the North Korean sample and in this context, it tends to increase its hegemony in the region through its nuclear program.

 

 

 

 

 

Underlining that the real “great bargaining” is done between Iran and the USA/West, and that a sustainable solution for the problem seems impossible at the moment unless the US provides security guarantees that could remove the regional concerns of Iran, the seminar emphasized the rightfulness of the concerns regarding the future of the Iranian regime that has become neighbors with the US forces as a result of the military operations carried out in Afghanistan and Iraq.

During the seminar, certain speakers underlined that diplomatic channels have not been completely blocked yet although the international community has been caught between the US that is not flexible at all and Iran that shows no compromise against these demands. These circles also advocate that, given the sensitive balances among the influential power circles in the leadership, the Tehran regime “is able to take a step back when its permanence is at stake”. On the other hand, a group of opposing panelists underlined that the Iranian nuclear program has turned into a show of strength between the US/West and Iran, and that the parties have gradually reinforced their positions. At this point, they reached an agreement on that the US has advocated that “Iran’s violation of The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the provisions of the Charters of the International Atomic Energy Agency would not be rewarded”, while the Tehran regime stated that “the US Leadership has focused on changing the regime in Iran, therefore it would be impossible for them to make concessions in their policies”. Unless the parties change their uncompromising attitudes, a solution for the problem will be impossible to reach.

It was emphasized that the Iranian President, believing that Iran’s stance during this crisis has been beneficial for Iran, acts with the belief that “Iran can only resist by pursuing strong politics against the West that has not supported the inter-civilizations dialogue and reform perspectives realized by Khatami”. It was also underlined that Iran, holding the strings during this current crisis, has observed that the concessions it obtained have gone up as it makes more difficulties.

Certain speakers stated that three different circles exist in the Iranian internal politics platform and society. Comprised of “President Ahmadinejad and the ideological circles that support him”, “the group that wants to implement the nuclear program based upon international standards in the framework of The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, without breaking the ties with the outer world,” and the “pragmatists” that can be categorized as the weakest segment of society, these three different circles of society are in agreement on the necessity for a nuclear program.

Underlining that two thirds of the Iranian population is under 30 years old and that 30 percent of people is living under the poverty line, that despite the serious political and socio-economic problems in the country the regime does not hesitate to apply pressure upon different circles of society for its own permanence, the participants stated that only 10-15 percent of 70 million people supports the regime, but this proportion is enough to intimidate all the people. They also stressed that in President Ahmadinejad’s electoral victory, an environment similar to the Hamas-Al Fatah dynamics in Palestine has been influential.

In the conclusion of the seminar, it was emphasized that Iran’s role in the future of Iraq is a part of the regional equation. The success of the US in the operation in Iraq has created an opinion in Iran that “the next move would be a regime change in Iran”. Considering a puppet leadership in Baghdad guided by the US unacceptable, Iran wants to see that the multinational forces in Iraq acquire a genuine international position. The Kurdish issue in Iraq is another matter that disturbs Iran. Acting in this context, Iran has already turned the demographic structure of Iraq to its advantage. Iran also longs for the maintenance of a low level atmosphere of chaos in Iraq that it could manage.

In the conclusion of the seminar it was stated that the US-Iran encounter would take place in Iraq rather than Iranian territories and the Hezbollah/Lebanon-Syria axis. Further suspending stability in Iraq through the Shiites, Iran could damage the US interests in the region. In this context, politically speaking, the biggest loss of the West would be the unification of all circles of Iranian society around the Tehran regime. Given the messages coming from the region, it is observed that the Gulf countries do not want to see a new conflict in the region and they do not want Iran to turn into a nuclear power, either. The seminar was concluded with a call indicating that “the international community should take necessary measures, taking all these negative consequences into consideration”.

 

Arts & Culture