Interview with Ensaf News Agency, June 25, 2024 -
The interview was in Persian and the translation below was done by Ai.
Ensaf News: How is foreign policy explained in the eyes of the election candidates?
Karimi: The candidates’ programs can be accurately assessed according to their paradigms, and the details of the programs cannot be quantified and compared during the election competition. There are two basic approaches that are expressed to different degrees:
Sanctions approach: People according to this view believe that the country can survive under the current sanctions conditions. Saeed Jalili is the most ardent defender of this approach. Ghazizadeh and Zakani, as two apparently cover candidates, also believe in continuing this view.
They apparently participated in the elections with the aim of having more time to explain this approach. They do not have a specific foreign policy and are following Jalili’s path based on using domestic capacities. “Capacity” is also a keyword that Jalili overuses.
Jalili’s Foreign Policy: Survival Instead of Development
The proponents of this approach think that the country can survive by attracting domestic resources, increasing productivity, and working with smaller countries and those surrounding Iran, and they focus on a foreign policy based on survival rather than development; unaware that productivity rates cannot be increased without having superior technology, innovative ideas, being connected to a network of international buyers and sellers, creating a competitive market, etc.
We do not know of any successful example in the world that has been able to succeed and increase productivity rates based on this view. They do not consider attracting foreign capital mandatory and are satisfied with having domestic capital. There is also not enough domestic capital.
The country needs at least 70 and a maximum of 250 billion dollars for investment per year. The maximum amount of floating capital in the country is $7 billion (foreign exchange market, gold, housing, etc.), and we cannot achieve the minimum investment figure of $70 billion per year.
Considering the discounted sale of oil to China under sanctions, the one million and five hundred thousand barrels that we sell to China have actually brought us about 700-800 thousand barrels, which of course fluctuates over time. About 400-500 thousand barrels are spent on current government expenses, and practically nothing is left for the country's productivity and development rate. This situation will become more difficult with the possible arrival of Trump.
For the development sector, they also raise various issues whose numbers are in the millions of dollars, and therefore, based on the calculation, there is no opening in foreign policy in this type of view.
The next trend is constructive interaction, which is announced in the 20-year vision document. Mr. Pourmohammadi, who has appeared in the elections as a powerful but minor candidate, represents this approach.
Due to his reservations, Mr. Ghalibaf tries to speak with complete caution in the field of foreign policy so as not to reduce his vote even further.
Pezzekian’s foreign policy
The day Mr. Pezzekian, along with Dr. Zarif and Dr. Sanaei, appeared on the foreign policy roundtable, they spoke about their approach, which is engagement and lifting sanctions through the revival of the JCPOA. In this approach, Pezzekian believes that in the field of technology, with restrictions such as filtering and banking restrictions due to being on the FATF blacklist, we have severely reduced our own development possibilities.
On the other hand, due to sanctions, there is a major obstacle to foreign investment in the country. People in the second approach consider foreign policy and the lifting of sanctions to be one of the main bottlenecks to development. The foreign policy of proponents of constructive engagement (such as Pezdekian) is defined by the three principles of dignity, wisdom, and expediency that are stated in the country's top-level documents.
Individuals with this approach try to write their foreign policy action plan based on these three points. (For example, the economy and capital attraction, the entry of technology, etc.) Also, controlling market inflammation by reducing foreign policy inflammation, reducing capital and currency market tensions, etc., through reducing inflammation is considered important in this approach.
This perspective looks at the issue more causally than causally. That is, foreign policy in this approach wants to address the reform of the country's economy and social conditions, the issue of immigration, accumulations of social anger, and the reduction of social capital.
Development with the help of a balanced foreign policy
Insaf News: Which approach in foreign policy is in favor of increasing the country's productivity and development?
Karimi: I think the appropriate approach is the foreign policy considered by Mr. Pezdekian, namely opening up through the removal of sanctions, which pursues the three issues of national interests, security, and dignity. An opportunity-oriented perspective is considered in this approach instead of a threat-oriented perspective. They want to remove a single-option policy and pursue a balanced foreign policy.
Lifting sanctions, playing Iran’s role in the equations of global and regional order, using various capabilities, and contributing to the country’s economic development are defined as national interests. National security is also related to countering securitization and Iranophobia in the international and regional spheres through maintaining and strengthening the country’s deterrence and regional coalition-building.
The axis of national dignity is also through pursuing smart power and a correct image of Iran and addressing the issue of Iranians abroad and the issue of new equalities. Attracting new equalities also helps productivity and economic development.
Ensaf News: Some people agree with the first approach that we should not necessarily interact with the United States and Europe, and that we can develop with other countries. What is your opinion?
Karimi: We are not facing a closed watermelon and a black box in 1400, so we can assume that this kind of approach might have a good result. The country was governed for three years with this approach, and we saw its results.
We may want to have good relations with other countries, but those countries, due to the volume of their relations with the United States and the West and their political and economic influence from the United States, are often not prepared to choose between us and the United States to work with! Even with Oman, which we have good relations with, Oman prevented Iranian businessmen from bypassing banking matters and so on, due to its relations with the United States and Europe.
Removing obstacles through lifting sanctions
It is not like we can choose between countries in such a situation. Our issue is not America, and we do not necessarily want to work with America. Incidentally, our issue is to remove barriers from working with the same countries.
On the other hand, having diverse options in the foreign policy and foreign trade, investment, etc. portfolio leads to high efficiency and does not present us as having a single-option foreign policy.
Having diverse choices makes the price offered by partners an optimal price; because when we have no other option, our partner will also raise its price for us.
In order to have good relations with our partners and friends, we must both create openings in the form of removing barriers and pursue a balanced foreign policy; because otherwise, we will become a cheap partner for our partners!
Ensaf News Link
File
