Essay on Etemad Newspaper December 28, 2023 -
The original text is in Persian and the following translation was done by Ai.
Regardless of the official positions regarding the nuclear negotiations that have been going on for about 20 years by different negotiating teams, the fact is that each side of such negotiations and mobilization has pursued its own specific goals. The negotiations have always had two wings: nuclear and lifting of sanctions: the first is the agreed limitations that, while not causing substantial damage to Iran's nuclear industry, ensure the demand of the P5+1, centered on the West, namely the declared position of "assurance of peacefulness", and the second is the lifting of international sanctions, which has been Iran's basic demand and has itself been pursued for various purposes. But apart from removing economic sanctions, which has been known and declared as Iran's main motivation throughout history, the fact is that both sanctions and their absence have various other effects and consequences.
Even if we look at international relations in the context of Hans Morgenthau's realism in his book "Politics Among Nations", one of the eight factors of the power of countries in facing each other is the "quality of diplomacy". Let alone that in the current era, neither the theory known as realism is the most prominent theory of international relations, nor is Morgenthau's version its most up-to-date version. But the quality of diplomacy, in addition to placing the country in a prominent position in bilateral confrontations, causes arrangements that place the country under discussion in a more prominent position of activism in multilateral and international relations. This meaning is, of course, based on the assumption that international activism and role-playing can strengthen national interests and, at the same time, international interests.
One of the most important non-economic effects of the JCPOA, which is perhaps increasingly apparent these days and at the same time increasingly denied, is the extent of Iran's regional and international role-playing: The negotiations leading to the JCPOA created a context in the international environment from the very beginning in which Iran could be accepted as an effective actor and cooperate with other effective actors in this area in the Middle East and West Asia. Of course, Iran's role in these equations has always existed and has also been a function of Iran's regional military power and meaningful influence in groups inclined towards this country, but it cannot be denied that close and intensive relations with world powers between 1992 and 1994 had increased Iran's regional and international relations from the aforementioned level: Iran's role was now not only maintained by maintaining the country's initiative as an independent actor in regional equations, but its level had increased, and ironically, this position and role had been accepted by other parties and, in general, major actors in the international environment as part of the solution.
One of the most important examples of Iran's participation as an influential member in the political equations of the region was the Astana initiative, which was formed in the years after the implementation of the JCPOA for peace in Syria by Iran, Russia, and Turkey, and, ironically, it also became effective. At the same time as the Astana initiative, similar ideas were put forward by other combinations of actors and activists, none of which were sufficiently effective. The reality was that this active Iranian actorship, which was accepted even by the US and Europe in some way and ultimately became the locus of influence in the Syrian peace process, was not only due to the field equations resulting from Iran’s actions and strategic proximity more than in the past, but also due to the political and diplomatic equations resulting from tight negotiations, which, as a side effect, had increased the country’s capacity to act.
Incidentally, one of the main reasons for the opposition of Iran’s regional rivals and adversaries, such as Saudi Arabia and Israel, to the JCPOA was this very factor of Iran’s increasing role in the equations. So much so that if we go back to the past and review the history after the JCPOA, we will witness a kind of passive reaction in response to Iran’s international actions and cooperation.
Consensus-building and bringing countries along with them is one of the most effective approaches in advancing the goals of a country or group in the international environment. This is why even a country like the United States, despite its power, still tries to advance its agenda in the international environment by bringing other countries along and taking steps to gain some kind of support and, if possible, build an international consensus, and not just relying on its hard power. This was strengthened during the Democratic rule in the White House and has been the least and weakest during Donald Trump's presidency. Of course, this was one of the most important axes of criticism of this era by Democrats and Republicans with a long history.
Of course, this is not unique to the United States, but it seems that increasing the capacity for action through case-by-case interactions with governments on a specific issue, and not simply having close state and non-state allies, is a recurring lesson that can perhaps be considered one of the main tasks of the foreign policy apparatus.
On the other hand, with the marginalization of real and substantive negotiations to revive the JCPOA, as well as the actions that are observed in other areas to limit and isolate Iran, it seems that the depth and consistency of Iran's international relations, especially in terms of effective action on common international issues, as part of the solution, are becoming weaker and less, which can perhaps be traced to the weakness of the agency in the upper part of the pyramid of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
In addition, as this process progresses, the country's missions will gradually lose their important role in the text of their mission, and that is effective action based on self-confidence, which is injected from the action of the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, so that the mission will become a place for formalities with the host country, and the experienced cadres of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will also lose their self-confidence and initiative to enter into solutions to international issues and multilateral talks on transnational issues.
In addition, it should be noted that Iran is not naturally located in the world's prominent ethnic, linguistic, regional, religious, or even economic blocs, and therefore always needs to move to gain more support at the government level and consolidate its role in international equations.
In any case, the side effect of the JCPOA for Iran to play a greater role in international and regional equations has come to an end and this account has been emptied. The evidence of this meaning is the efforts that we are witnessing these days to isolate Iran, both in international forums and in initiatives and talks: so that Iran is not only not a determining and innovative member, but also, based on its membership, is limited to the extent possible by others, and this can be observed in the speeches of Emmanuel Macron, the new German government, etc. In addition, the activities of the honorable Minister of Foreign Affairs and his deputies in effective and substantive trips and meetings with influential countries with regional and international power and influence can be evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively in comparison with different similar periods.
To avoid any isolation in the international environment, of course, we cannot wait for the disappearance of the hostility of the adversaries, the competition of the rivals, or a sudden change in the equations in such a way that our situation will change for the better. Rather, this requires professional and wise planning and implementation that, first, has a basis in reality on the ground and not in outdated or merely subjective analyses, and second, has the appropriate agent at its disposal: the foreign policy apparatus of public relations is not another equation, but can itself be an innovator and, incidentally, a source of influence in the equations that create power for the country. As explained above, the quality of diplomacy itself is a power-generating element and can provide a reserve account for increasing the country's international role, and moving in the opposite direction can lead to the country's diminution or even elimination from major international equations, which is of course an irreparable loss: the world should not be allowed to get used to "life without Iran."
In addition to placing the country in a prominent position in bilateral encounters, the quality of diplomacy makes arrangements that place the country under discussion in a more prominent position of activism in multilateral and international relations.
The foreign policy apparatus is not the public relations of other equations, but can itself be the innovator and, incidentally, the source of influence in power-generating equations for the country. The quality of diplomacy itself is a power-generating element and can provide a reserve account for increasing the country's international role, and moving in the opposite direction can lead to the country's diminution or even elimination from major international equations, which is of course an irreparable loss.
To avoid any isolation in the international environment, of course, we cannot wait for the disappearance of the hostility of enemies, the competition of rivals, or a sudden change in equations in such a way that our situation changes in the objective direction. Rather, this requires professional and wise planning and implementation that is based on reality on the ground and not on outdated or merely mental analyses.
Etemad Link
File
