University of Tehran professor Sayyed Mohamed Marandi takes a turn on Conflicts Forum
Excerpt and editing by Carolyn Bennett
MIDDLE EAST — A GREATER INTEREST
“The Islamic Republic of Iran’s interest in a stable Middle East,” Sayyed Mohamed Marandi writes, “is arguably greater than that of the United States. This is, after all, Iran’s neighborhood. “For Iran to grow and prosper, it needs secure borders and stable neighbors. A poor and unstable Afghanistan, for example, inhibits trade and, potentially, increases the flow of refugees and narcotics into northeastern Iran.”
Iraq/Iran relationship
“Iran believes that fundamental change in Iranian-Iraqi relations is more than a future possibility. It already has been achieved.…
“… [T]he Islamic Republic of Iran wants a strong and stable Iraq, but an Iraq that is on good terms with Iran and works to further the interests of the region’s population as a whole. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s recent statement that American troops must leave the country by the end of 2011 is a strong sign that this is actually happening.
“The same logic applies to Afghanistan. The majority of Afghans share strong religious and cultural links with Iran. Most speak the Persian language.
“Iran has invested heavily in the relatively more stable north of [Afghanistan], building roads and infrastructure—despite what Iranians believe to be the utter failure of U.S. policy in Afghanistan. Trade has risen sharply. Moderate Sunnis and Shias, who were supported by Iran when the United States effectively allowed the then-Saudi- and UAE-funded Taliban to overrun the country, look increasingly to Iran for support — as people in [Afghanistan] feel that the United States has lost the war and will inevitably be forced to leave their country.”
Cultures, kin, conflict — Lebanon, Palestine
“Regarding Palestine and Lebanon, it is a major mistake for western experts to believe that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s support for the people of these countries, especially the people of Palestine, is in any way cynical. If one looks at the pre-Revolution statements of current Iranian leaders, one will see that the issue of Palestine was a central grievance of the opposition to the [U.S.-backed] Shah. Indeed, one of the many mistakes of the so-called green movement was to miscalculate, deeply, the depth of Iranian sympathy for Palestinians during last year’s riots in Tehran on the last Friday of Ramadan. The kidnapping and murder of Iranian scientists and former government officials by Israeli agents has added further anger.…
“Iranian support for Palestine, Lebanon, and the Resistance movements is unwavering and any expectation in the west that, under certain circumstances, Iran will end this policy is unfounded.
“However, official Iranian policy has also always held that, while Iran will not recognize Israel, because it is an apartheid state (the same as its South Africa policy during apartheid), it will respect any decision made by the Palestinian people in this regard.
“From the Iranian perspective, any decision will have to include all Palestinians living both inside the country and outside it. That would include the millions who continue to live in refugee camps.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran supports Lebanon’s independence and sovereignty and it believes that Lebanon and Lebanese civilians can only be protected from Israeli aggression through the Resistance in southern Lebanon. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran will support Hezbollah at all costs.”
WILLFUL IGNORANCE
FLAWED FOREIGN POLICY
“American leaders are deceiving themselves if they believe the WikiLeaks cables describing the hostility of a number of Arab leaders towards Iran …. This becomes clear when one looks at the 2010 Arab Public Opinion Poll, which reveals that a very strong majority of Arabs support Iran’s nuclear program. The poll also shows that, while 88 percent of Arabs view the Israeli regime as a threat, 77 percent view the United States as a threat. Only 10 percent view the Islamic Republic of Iran as a threat. (By way of comparison, 10 percent also viewed Algeria as a threat).”
U. S. War talk
“Some speculate that as the so-called axis of moderation declines alongside the declining fortunes of the United States, Washington may be tempted to move towards limited military confrontation with the Islamic Republic before the U.S. presidential election in 2012.
“Iranians believe this to be highly unlikely but Iranians also believe that stability or instability from the Mediterranean to the borders of India is inextricably linked to peace and stability in the Persian Gulf region. … If there is no security for Iranians, then, in the eyes of Iranians, there will be no security for Iran’s antagonists in the region.
“Under such conditions, the United States should not expect oil or gas to flow out of the Persian Gulf, northern Iraq, or Central Asia. …
“Western governments must recognize that Iran is looking for peace but it is not intimidated by the threat of war. Such threats make western governments look crude and uncivilized.…”
Iranians remember
“[Iranians] will not forget that their suffering was largely because of American and European support for Saddam Hussein—including Western support for his acquisition of weapons of mass destruction, which he regularly used against Iranian and Iraqi civilians.
“There was no condemnation from western governments or even the western media for these cruel and barbaric acts. Iranians believe that western leaders are just as guilty for these crimes against humanity as [was] Saddam Hussein.
“…Iran never used or produced chemical weapons either during the [Iran/Iraq] war or afterwards, despite the technological capability to do so. This alone, Iranians regularly point out, is evidence that the Islamic Republic of Iran is honest when it states that it has no intention of acquiring nuclear weapons.”
Iranians believe
“[In addition to the tragic situation brought about as a result of what Iranians see as the foolish invasion of Iraq and the failed American strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan], Iranians believe U.S. foreign policymakers, by closing their eyes to Saudi support for hardliner Salafi groups worldwide, are making things more difficult for themselves.
“This is also in addition to what Tehran views as America’s blind support for the world’s final apartheid state, which jails and abuses women and children from the indigenous Palestinian population and kills rock-throwing young men trapped in concentration camp like conditions. All of this is making current U.S. policy in the Middle East, in the long term, unsustainable. This is especially true as America’s emerging strategic and economic competitors, such as the ‘BRIC’ countries (China, India, Brazil and Russia) make gains at all levels while the United States continues to bleed.”
“Iran is prepared to continue living without relations with the United States in the years to come. More and more of Iran’s young business professionals are looking to Asia and countries such as China, India, Brazil and South Africa for higher education, business and trade opportunities. Nevertheless, there are those who still wonder if there is a potential partner in the United States, who can rethink U.S. foreign policy and bring about real change in U.S.-Iranian relations.”
Sources and notes
“The Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States, and the Balance of Power in the Middle East” (Sayyed Mohamed Marandi), http://conflictsforum.org/what-is-conflicts-forum/
Sayyed Mohamed Marandi is an associate professor in English Literature (University of Tehran, Iran) and a regular commentator on international news and current affairs
This article appeared on Conflicts Forum under ARTICLES, Iran, Middle East, Obama administration, War in Iraq, War on terrorism, posted: January 14, 2011, http://conflictsforum.org/2011/the-islamic-republic-of-iran-the-united-states-and-the-balance-of-power-in-the-middle-east/
Conflicts Forum
“At a time when it becomes increasingly clear that the West’s military intrusion into the Islamic world is not serving as an instrument of constructive political change, Conflicts Forum aims to engage and listen to Islamists, while challenging Western misconceptions and misrepresentations of the region’s leading agents of change.
“[I]n the polarized climate following September 11, 2001 - U.S. foreign policy has failed to differentiate between the many strands of Islamic activism that we see across the world today. During deepening crises in the region, the U.S. refuses to talk to the Islamists who can influence events. [The U.S. does not] talk to Hamas, Hezbollah, or the Muslim Brotherhood; shuns Iran, Syria, and others. While facing increasingly intractable problems in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Pakistan and elsewhere, [the U.S. immobilizes] by turning away from homegrown political forces that have the power to resolve these crises. Our unwillingness to engage in dialogue with those who do not share our view of the world has brought us to an impasse. Conflicts Forum is breaking through the wall of silence.
“[Conflicts Forum’s] reach goes well beyond the Middle East to working with Islamist groups in North Africa and Pakistan and consulting with Islamic political movements in South and East Asia. Though the focus is on forging an understanding with political Islam, Conflicts Forum engages the entire spectrum of Islamist societies — in cultural and economic realms as well as the political.”Encounters with political Islam — with both non-violent and armed resistance groups — have led [CF] to the conclusion that “Islamism is above all political [and] the overwhelming majority of Islamists are striving to create just societies and bring about political reform in a region entrenched with inequity and that has long suffered the overbearing influence of foreign powers.”
“Conflicts Forum began in 2004 with aims of opening a new relationship between the West and the Muslim world. Since the late 1980s, the Forum’s directors, Alastair Crooke and Mark Perry, “have been in dialogue with a wide range of leading Islamists. During this period, Islamism has emerged as the most significant indigenous political force in the region.” http://conflictsforum.org/what-is-conflicts-forum/
______________________________________________
Bennett's books available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; The Book Den, Ltd.: BookDenLtd@frontiernet.net [Danville, NY]; Talking Leaves Books-Elmwood: talking.leaves.elmwood@gmail.com [Buffalo, NY]; Book House of Stuyvesant Plaza: http://www.bhny.com/ [Albany, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY]; LONGS’ Cards and Books: http://longscardsandbooks.com/ [Penn Yan, NY]
______________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment