Essay on Etemad Newspaper, April 8, 2021 -
The original text is in Persian and the following translation was done by Ai.
Now that Iran’s negotiations with the Joint Commission on the JCPOA are underway, the analyst has more scope to analyze Iran’s foreign relations. In the few days since the new year, foreign policy has had two important milestones in addition to its current and usual affairs: one is the signing of the Comprehensive Cooperation Document between Iran and China, which has had significant repercussions in public opinion and cyberspace, and the other is serious movements regarding the revival of the JCPOA and political interaction between Iran and the United States: two matters about which there is currently not much information available.
Unfortunately, due to the half-hearted and half-historical memory of the non-elite and the dusty media and political atmosphere in the country, for years every forward-looking agreement with any party in the world has been trivialized by a group and movement inside or outside the country called "Turkmenchay", causing resentment and anxiety in public opinion: whether it is an action plan like the JCPOA, which was inherently focused on a very specific and specific issue, or investments in the oil and gas and automotive sectors with Europeans, or strategic cooperation with Russia, or a small contract like fishing on the southern coast of the country. It even seems like an effort is underway to inflict a kind of self-deprecation on public opinion in the face of Afghanistan, which has built a dam on the border waters, so that a more polluted atmosphere is created as much as possible and the fishy ones can profit from this muddiness.
In this regard, the most important in recent years was the JCPOA, which was interpreted by domestic conservatives as colonialism and a commitment to the West, the other issue was the issue of the initial understanding on the sovereignty of the Caspian Sea, and finally the comprehensive strategic document between Iran and China, the latter two of which were typically labeled as "selling out Iran" by the opposition to the sovereignty movement, thereby hurting collective feelings and weakening national morale. The interesting point of the matter is that for the "critics" of any understanding with other countries, it makes no difference whether, like the first two cases - the JCPOA and the initial understanding with Russia - all the details of the documents have been published or, like what was done in the case of China, the signed text has not been exposed to public opinion and approved by the parliament. Another is that a single government is simultaneously accused of violating Iran's rights to the West and selling it to the East, and this is a strange thing in itself.
The fact is that this type of thinking about international events and the country's foreign policy interactions, which also have a negative impact on the country's position in any negotiation, has two main roots: one is the sad history that has left a dark mark on the collective minds of Iranians from the Iran-Russia wars, and domestic and foreign media influencers have taken advantage of this collective memory and have heightened the atmosphere of pessimism after every understanding, and the other is the Cold War mentality that has remained in the minds of the masses and even the dominant mindset of the political elites has not yet distanced itself from it. It must be believed that today, both the colonial era has ended and signing any agreement is not like being colonized and placed under guardianship, and the bipolar world has long since ended and national interests are not going to be held hostage to one of the two poles of the Cold War through a specific interaction. If we look at the extensive commercial, scientific, political, and even military interactions of many countries today, we will see that turning from the West to the East and vice versa is the most wrong game possible in the current international environment. Countries in the European context such as Germany, despite their status in the European Union and their close interactions with the United States, Canada and Britain, do not deprive themselves of close and extensive cooperation with China, Russia, as well as India, Korea and Japan. Turkey, which is one of the most important military alliances in the world, namely NATO, and therefore a strategic and military ally of the West, has the closest interactions with China and, in some cases, even buys the most advanced weapons from Russia, regardless of the dealings of the United States and Europe. The same can be found in the East: despite the fact that the biggest and most sensitive competition in the world today is between the United States and China, the largest trade interaction is also between these two countries, and the United States is the largest buyer and debtor to China. It can also be clearly observed and followed in the interactions of many other countries such as Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Eastern European countries, etc.
Unfortunately, due to the half-hearted and half-historical memory of the non-elite and the dusty media and political atmosphere in the country, for years every forward-looking agreement with any party in the world has been trivialized by a group and movement inside or outside the country called "Turkmenchay", causing resentment and anxiety in public opinion: whether it is an action plan like the JCPOA, which was inherently focused on a very specific and specific issue, or investments in the oil and gas and automotive sectors with Europeans, or strategic cooperation with Russia, or a small contract like fishing on the southern coast of the country. It even seems like an effort is underway to inflict a kind of self-deprecation on public opinion in the face of Afghanistan, which has built a dam on the border waters, so that a more polluted atmosphere is created as much as possible and the fishy ones can profit from this muddiness.
In this regard, the most important in recent years was the JCPOA, which was interpreted by domestic conservatives as colonialism and a commitment to the West, the other issue was the issue of the initial understanding on the sovereignty of the Caspian Sea, and finally the comprehensive strategic document between Iran and China, the latter two of which were typically labeled as "selling out Iran" by the opposition to the sovereignty movement, thereby hurting collective feelings and weakening national morale. The interesting point of the matter is that for the "critics" of any understanding with other countries, it makes no difference whether, like the first two cases - the JCPOA and the initial understanding with Russia - all the details of the documents have been published or, like what was done in the case of China, the signed text has not been exposed to public opinion and approved by the parliament. Another is that a single government is simultaneously accused of violating Iran's rights to the West and selling it to the East, and this is a strange thing in itself.
The fact is that this type of thinking about international events and the country's foreign policy interactions, which also have a negative impact on the country's position in any negotiation, has two main roots: one is the sad history that has left a dark mark on the collective minds of Iranians from the Iran-Russia wars, and domestic and foreign media influencers have taken advantage of this collective memory and have heightened the atmosphere of pessimism after every understanding, and the other is the Cold War mentality that has remained in the minds of the masses and even the dominant mindset of the political elites has not yet distanced itself from it. It must be believed that today, both the colonial era has ended and signing any agreement is not like being colonized and placed under guardianship, and the bipolar world has long since ended and national interests are not going to be held hostage to one of the two poles of the Cold War through a specific interaction. If we look at the extensive commercial, scientific, political, and even military interactions of many countries today, we will see that turning from the West to the East and vice versa is the most wrong game possible in the current international environment. Countries in the European context such as Germany, despite their status in the European Union and their close interactions with the United States, Canada and Britain, do not deprive themselves of close and extensive cooperation with China, Russia, as well as India, Korea and Japan. Turkey, which is one of the most important military alliances in the world, namely NATO, and therefore a strategic and military ally of the West, has the closest interactions with China and, in some cases, even buys the most advanced weapons from Russia, regardless of the dealings of the United States and Europe. The same can be found in the East: despite the fact that the biggest and most sensitive competition in the world today is between the United States and China, the largest trade interaction is also between these two countries, and the United States is the largest buyer and debtor to China. It can also be clearly observed and followed in the interactions of many other countries such as Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Eastern European countries, etc.
It should be noted that the most important possible tactics for increasing and developing national interests in international interactions are the positive balance policy and the negative balance policy, which can be chosen at any time depending on the circumstances. Today, it seems that the positive balance policy is more useful, given the pressure imposed on Iran by the West, and by strengthening relations with China and Russia, and by reiterating that these rapprochements should not be evaluated in the bipolar framework of the Cold War and the 20th century, while securing national interests, it can be used to neutralize American pressures and stimulate Europe to engage closely with Iran. Of course, this should never be seen as a short-term game and a tool for using relations with one country, but rather adopting a policy of expanding international interactions at several levels can always be pursued and national interests can be secured from several directions.
Finally, it seems that first of all, emotional and media-influenced reactions should be avoided and efforts should be made to obtain as much information as possible from official and reliable sources and make it the subject of analysis. Second, in analyzing the issue, more impartial experts should be consulted. However, in cases such as the Comprehensive Iran-China Cooperation Document, which is not a binding contract or treaty but merely a general and non-binding strategic document, publishing the text is not necessary. It is as if China's interaction with forty-nine countries is a tradition of comprehensive cooperation.
In addition, it should be noted that the implementation of such a cooperation document is subject to the conclusion of relevant contracts and as a prelude to the opening of the JCPOA, the lifting of sanctions, and Iran's accession to the necessary financial transfer treaties, of course, while preserving national interests.
Therefore, the signing of the Comprehensive Iran-China Cooperation Document is not only not against the JCPOA and resolving the nuclear issue, but on the one hand it has helped to open this knot and on the other hand, its implementation is subject to this opening.
With the signing of this initial document with China and the movements that we have witnessed through the recent meetings of the Joint Commission of the JCPOA, we can optimistically propose the country's foreign policy outlook, considering the current capacities in the following areas:
1. Expanding relations in the fields of investment, infrastructure and energy at the levels of government interactions with China,
2. Expanding strategic and military relations with Russia,
3. Expanding technological and trade interactions of the private sector and numerous small and medium-sized companies with Europe,
4. Containing US pressure using the above levers,
5. De-escalating tensions, increasing scientific, industrial and trade interactions with neighbors.
Only if these mutual dependencies and interactions between them increase can we be sure that conspiracies such as military movements and other economic sanctions will not be "useless" for the adversaries and that Iran will be accepted with full authority in the international order and will open its place more than ever before. Because in any potential dispute, there are multiple parties that will be forced to practically defend Iran's position due to their own interests.
Therefore, it seems that while avoiding the anxiety imposed by the media, it is better to focus on facts, official texts, and serious, not malicious, analyses. This can help ensure and develop national interests and benefit from this accumulated and respected energy of citizens in order to elevate the country.
Files
