No Permanent Enemies or Friends, Only Permanent Interests

30 January 2014 | 20:15 Code : 1928080 From the Other Media General category’s interview with Davood Hermidas Bavand, a university professor and expert on international affairs
No Permanent Enemies or Friends, Only Permanent Interests

-Henry John Temple, Britain’s Prime Minister from 1850 to 1860, made the following statement during those years, a sentence which has become an everlasting remark in history and international relations and that is: “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual.”

-This statement has now become an example for all countries of the world and they attempt to set their relations on this basis. It means that the countries of the world make efforts to put national interests on top of their agenda in their relations with the entire world.

-Along this line and based on these conditions and also national interests, countries open the gate of friendship even with their former enemies and enter into negotiation to reach an understanding.

-Winston Churchill, the renowned British Prime Minister, had stated during the years of WWII that “I am ready to put my hands in the hands of the devil for the progress of my country.” Apart from the value of this statement and whether this approach is ethically correct or not, it must be said that this is the political reality of the world.

-We have not forgotten that following the events of September 11, the only country in the region that gained the most interests based on an undeclared relation with the US was the Islamic Republic of Iran.

 -Iran and the US’ joint cooperation in Afghanistan expelled the threat which was expanding against our country on a daily basis, i.e. al-Qaeda and Salafism, without even a bullet being fired from Iran and Iran benefited from this cooperation. Therefore, the permanent enemy does not have an existentialist philosophy and Iran’s relations with other countries must be based on relative arguments not absolute ideas.

-Those who believe that Iran must not have constructive relations with the world and must establish blocs for its international relations, as during WWII, wherein it had to have relations with certain countries and put some on the list of enemies, do not have a correct understanding of international relations.

-Politics is an art and the technique of distinguishing different situations to make the best use of them for national interests. During the Vietnam War, China entered the war with the US and the relations between the two countries were, for years, under the shadow of tension and hostility. But the same country at another time decided to extend a hand of friendship to the US to provide the interests of the country and naturally its people which consequently led to the economic blossoming of China in the world.

-This example must be pursued by the Islamic Republic of Iran and the improvement of relations between Tehran and Washington must be on our country’s agenda if it would safeguard Iran’s national interests.

-So long as the relations between Iran and the US are based on tension and hostility, safeguarding the interests of Iran in the world and the establishment of relations with the influential countries in international relations will not be easy and the Islamic Republic of Iran is bound to pursue its interests through giving concessions to countries like China and Russia which means paying unnecessary costs from the people’s pocket.

-It is better for the critics of the Geneva Agreement to change their pessimism with optimism for a while.

-The result of the policies of the past eight years, when our foreign policy was based on attacks and creating tension in relations with the world, the country was directed towards a cliff. If the 11th presidential election had not led to a change in the administration, the situation would have become even worse.

-Now, based on a wise approach, the government has decided to change the previous approach for the survival of the country and save the country by pursuing a peaceful solution on the basis of constructive dialogue.

-This is the people’s demand as well; those who participated in the election in an atmosphere of indifference and with their choice let the Iranian officials and the world hear their message of change.

-On the same basis of the demands of the Iranian people, the government of Iran entered into constructive and interactive relations with the world powers. The reflection of this interaction was manifested in the first step of the nuclear agreement with the P5+1 called the Joint Plan of Action. This is the path which the government has correctly pursued and must continue with the support of all groups in order to safeguard the interests of the country so that an agreement could be reached which would satisfy all parties.

tags: iran nuclear geneva

( 8 )

Your Comment :