Musavi’s Foreign Diplomacy
Reconstructing regional relations and lifting sanctions are Musavi’s priorities. Interview with Javid Ghorban Oghli, head of foreign diplomacy committee of Mir Hosein Musavi’s electoral headquarters.
What is Musavi’s general strategy in foreign diplomacy?
From what I’ve understood so far, for Musavi diplomacy is a means for country’s multidirectional development and it should emplace Iran in the global position it deserves. We can expand international ties while preserving our values and principles. Our only exception is Israel. Musavi’s foreign diplomacy will fulfill our national interests and it will not be based on personal whims. Tactics may change but strategies will remain the same.
Just like any other country, our foreign diplomacy will naturally consider our sovereignty, territorial integrity and national dignity. Musavi is going to adopt negotiation as a powerful diplomatic tool which advances our objectives.
His foreign diplomacy will be based on a realistic understanding of global developments and the forces which influence global trends. A realistic approach needs political rationality. And to achieve political rationality we need to stretch a hand for all those who believe in the constitution and the principles of Islamic Republic. That renders our decisions elaborate, based on national interests and a realistic understanding of global realities.
Foreign diplomacy is a national concern and all our national resources should serve its fulfillment. Basic documents such as the constitution, documents of Iran’s 20-year perspective and the fifth development program are going to be our navigator in foreign diplomacy. Our strategic decisions will be also directed by the Supreme Leader.
But our foreign diplomacy has also other missions: development of country in economic and social aspects, attracting foreign investment and consequent increase of production. Our behavior shouldn’t isolate the country. And we shouldn’t focus on countries that are just receivers of our aids and solve not any of our problems.
How are these countries prioritized? Which come first: our neighbors or European and Latin American countries?
As I’ve understood Musavi’s point of views, his priority is our neighboring countries and Islamic states. He favors a regional focus due to our superior position in Middle East, Central Asia and Caucasus. With a chaotic diplomacy within the past four years we have either lost our friends or provoked them against ourselves and now we see how they are acting against us in both their propaganda and diplomatic measures. With interconnected affairs of today’s world, a country’s adverse decision may be followed by a bloc of other countries. Illusion and adventurism –like starting the countdown for another country’s [United States] collapse- has been a calamity to our foreign diplomacy. We also adhere to principles, but this doesn’t mean that we seek adventure.
Iran is not in good terms with its neighboring countries these days. Last year was especially an unfortunate one for our foreign diplomacy. Does Mr. Musavi have any special plans for mending relations with neighbors?
I also believe that our relations are not in good conditions. Take our relations with Saudi Arabia for example. During Khatami’s presidency we even signed a security pact with them. Security pact is a critical document and its existence is an indicator of mutual trust between two countries. Hashemi’s term was the same and he was the initiator of détente process. But have a look at our relations with Persian Gulf states these days. The next administration should focus on reconstructing relations with these countries. None of the current threats were existent during Khatami’s presidency when we were moving towards building mutual trust.
I believe that with a change in political situation inside the country, our neighbors naturally want to resume friendly relations. One of the first things Ahmadinejad mentioned when rising to power was Iran’s shift to aggressive diplomacy. This baseless claim caused concern among Arab countries and if your remember, former foreign minister Ali Akbar Velayati was sent to these countries on behalf of the Supreme Leader to assure them that Iran’s foreign diplomacy undergoes no radical change.
We see that Ahmadinejad’s administration is even ready to embrace sanctions as the price of its policies. What are Mr. Musavi’s plans to deal with anti-Iranian sanctions?
Exposing the country against hardship is against both rationality and strategies of the Islamic Republic. Aggressive policies have imposed a series of sanctions against us. Of course we underwent sanctions after the revolution, but they were different since the originated from West’s hostility towards Iran and their concern with losing Iran as one of their power bases. However, the recent sanctions are of a different nature.
The way we deal with these problems is what counts here. We can adopt an intelligent policy based on dialogue and preserve our rights while blocking the intrusion of UN Security Council. The present sanctions are the result of some diplomatic delusions and acting against the proceedings of National Security Council. While even the D’Amato bill was quite ignored by many countries, including the European, and we were moving towards nullifying the U.S. sanctions, Ahmadinejad’s government entered the stage with a new rhetoric. They started without any clear plan and pushed our nuclear dossier towards U.N Security Council. Holocaust compounded our problems. Even the rightful owners of occupied territories, Palestinians, have not denied Holocaust.
Sanctions are a priority of our country, not only the government. Mr. President may call them worthless papers but we now how these worthless papers are ruining our economy. We are facing problems for investment, import of strategic goods, purchasing technological needs and money transfer. Other countries aren’t opening letters of credit for us. Our banks are under sanction. So the next government must think of breaking these chains at first place. We can tackle these problems even with a discourse based on our principles and values and without any retreat, though it will not be an easy task.
What about relations with United States and the normalization of ties? What are Musavi’s plans?
As Mr. Musavi said this depends on United States’ behavior.
Musavi said he is even ready to meet Obama.
Sure. He said that in his first press conference and he said that relations with United States are not a taboo. The truth is that United States’ new administration has taken the initial steps even if verbally. As one example, they have said that they’re ready to negotiate without conditions. This was not the case with Bush’s administration that used a threatening language. Definitely it is a constructive measure but we also need tangible moves. Even Ayatollah Khomeini had no problem with Iran-U.S. relations had they changed their attitude towards us. Now that change is happening in America we shouldn’t talk to Obama the way we talked to Bush. If United States relinquishes its domineering behavior we are ready to talk.
Of course likely negotiations are going to last for long since there are many arguments between Iran and United States. But America’s will is the critical factor. If they really want to change things I don’t think we have objections here. That is what I also understood form Supreme Leader’s speech in the Iranian New Year. He put it into words clearly and shrewdly: we are waiting for actual steps.
From what I’ve understood so far, for Musavi diplomacy is a means for country’s multidirectional development and it should emplace Iran in the global position it deserves. We can expand international ties while preserving our values and principles. Our only exception is Israel. Musavi’s foreign diplomacy will fulfill our national interests and it will not be based on personal whims. Tactics may change but strategies will remain the same.
Just like any other country, our foreign diplomacy will naturally consider our sovereignty, territorial integrity and national dignity. Musavi is going to adopt negotiation as a powerful diplomatic tool which advances our objectives.
His foreign diplomacy will be based on a realistic understanding of global developments and the forces which influence global trends. A realistic approach needs political rationality. And to achieve political rationality we need to stretch a hand for all those who believe in the constitution and the principles of Islamic Republic. That renders our decisions elaborate, based on national interests and a realistic understanding of global realities.
Foreign diplomacy is a national concern and all our national resources should serve its fulfillment. Basic documents such as the constitution, documents of Iran’s 20-year perspective and the fifth development program are going to be our navigator in foreign diplomacy. Our strategic decisions will be also directed by the Supreme Leader.
But our foreign diplomacy has also other missions: development of country in economic and social aspects, attracting foreign investment and consequent increase of production. Our behavior shouldn’t isolate the country. And we shouldn’t focus on countries that are just receivers of our aids and solve not any of our problems.
How are these countries prioritized? Which come first: our neighbors or European and Latin American countries?
As I’ve understood Musavi’s point of views, his priority is our neighboring countries and Islamic states. He favors a regional focus due to our superior position in Middle East, Central Asia and Caucasus. With a chaotic diplomacy within the past four years we have either lost our friends or provoked them against ourselves and now we see how they are acting against us in both their propaganda and diplomatic measures. With interconnected affairs of today’s world, a country’s adverse decision may be followed by a bloc of other countries. Illusion and adventurism –like starting the countdown for another country’s [United States] collapse- has been a calamity to our foreign diplomacy. We also adhere to principles, but this doesn’t mean that we seek adventure.
Iran is not in good terms with its neighboring countries these days. Last year was especially an unfortunate one for our foreign diplomacy. Does Mr. Musavi have any special plans for mending relations with neighbors?
I also believe that our relations are not in good conditions. Take our relations with Saudi Arabia for example. During Khatami’s presidency we even signed a security pact with them. Security pact is a critical document and its existence is an indicator of mutual trust between two countries. Hashemi’s term was the same and he was the initiator of détente process. But have a look at our relations with Persian Gulf states these days. The next administration should focus on reconstructing relations with these countries. None of the current threats were existent during Khatami’s presidency when we were moving towards building mutual trust.
I believe that with a change in political situation inside the country, our neighbors naturally want to resume friendly relations. One of the first things Ahmadinejad mentioned when rising to power was Iran’s shift to aggressive diplomacy. This baseless claim caused concern among Arab countries and if your remember, former foreign minister Ali Akbar Velayati was sent to these countries on behalf of the Supreme Leader to assure them that Iran’s foreign diplomacy undergoes no radical change.
We see that Ahmadinejad’s administration is even ready to embrace sanctions as the price of its policies. What are Mr. Musavi’s plans to deal with anti-Iranian sanctions?
Exposing the country against hardship is against both rationality and strategies of the Islamic Republic. Aggressive policies have imposed a series of sanctions against us. Of course we underwent sanctions after the revolution, but they were different since the originated from West’s hostility towards Iran and their concern with losing Iran as one of their power bases. However, the recent sanctions are of a different nature.
The way we deal with these problems is what counts here. We can adopt an intelligent policy based on dialogue and preserve our rights while blocking the intrusion of UN Security Council. The present sanctions are the result of some diplomatic delusions and acting against the proceedings of National Security Council. While even the D’Amato bill was quite ignored by many countries, including the European, and we were moving towards nullifying the U.S. sanctions, Ahmadinejad’s government entered the stage with a new rhetoric. They started without any clear plan and pushed our nuclear dossier towards U.N Security Council. Holocaust compounded our problems. Even the rightful owners of occupied territories, Palestinians, have not denied Holocaust.
Sanctions are a priority of our country, not only the government. Mr. President may call them worthless papers but we now how these worthless papers are ruining our economy. We are facing problems for investment, import of strategic goods, purchasing technological needs and money transfer. Other countries aren’t opening letters of credit for us. Our banks are under sanction. So the next government must think of breaking these chains at first place. We can tackle these problems even with a discourse based on our principles and values and without any retreat, though it will not be an easy task.
What about relations with United States and the normalization of ties? What are Musavi’s plans?
As Mr. Musavi said this depends on United States’ behavior.
Musavi said he is even ready to meet Obama.
Sure. He said that in his first press conference and he said that relations with United States are not a taboo. The truth is that United States’ new administration has taken the initial steps even if verbally. As one example, they have said that they’re ready to negotiate without conditions. This was not the case with Bush’s administration that used a threatening language. Definitely it is a constructive measure but we also need tangible moves. Even Ayatollah Khomeini had no problem with Iran-U.S. relations had they changed their attitude towards us. Now that change is happening in America we shouldn’t talk to Obama the way we talked to Bush. If United States relinquishes its domineering behavior we are ready to talk.
Of course likely negotiations are going to last for long since there are many arguments between Iran and United States. But America’s will is the critical factor. If they really want to change things I don’t think we have objections here. That is what I also understood form Supreme Leader’s speech in the Iranian New Year. He put it into words clearly and shrewdly: we are waiting for actual steps.