Iran is a constructive actor. The foundations of power and the geopolitical characteristics of Iran are such that they turn the country into being a balancing actor within the international system. The logic behind Iran possessing such a constructive role is that any instability in the region would affect Iran’s national interests.
The History of Iran Acting as a Balancing Actor
Since centuries ago or even from ancient times, the significance of balancing the role of Iran for the international system had been recognized. Iranian kings like Cyrus played a constructive and influential role in establishing the balance of power and the flourishing of cultures in the ancient world. The Iranian culture was transferred to the West by Alexander’s successors and played a major role in the development of Western culture. Similarly, the role of Iranians in preventing the invasion of the Mongols is important to the West. During the Safavid period, the Iranian Empire played an effective and constructive role in establishing equilibrium of power in the international system through depleting the Ottoman forces on the eastern front.
During the Second World War, Iran as a “bridge to victory” had played a prominent role in defeating Nazi Germany and consequently preventing the spread of Nazism and radicalism. Likewise, during the Pahlavi regime, Iran as a Western ally was a key factor in controlling communism and its access to the West’s interests in the Persian Gulf. The Islamic Revolution of Iran and the subsequent Iran-Iraq war had played a prominent role in controlling and undermining the power of the Ba’athist government of Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Moreover, during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, while adopting a neutralist policy and strengthening the country’s western borders Iran played a significant role in reinforcing the siege of Saddam Hussein’s forces.
In the wake of the fall of the Soviet Union and subsequent developments, Iran played a constructive and active role in controlling the two crises in Central Asia and the Caucasus, namely the Tajikistan Insurgency and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. In the 1990s, the negotiations and peace talks between the parties involved in the Tajikistan Insurgency were held in Tehran. In addition, during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Iran was considered as a platform for establishing contacts between the parties involved and the opposition groups and the international system. Undoubtedly, Iran’s influence as one of the balancing power factors in the region was a key factor in resolving the above-mentioned crises.
Iran’s Constructive Role in Building a New Afghanistan
After the events of September 11th, the constructive role that Iran plays in the international arena has become more highlighted and reached its peak when the country took a pivotal role in the process of overthrowing the Taliban and the war on global terrorism through developing coordination at the domestic, regional and international levels.
At the national level, Iran played an important role in overthrowing the Taliban government, with backing the Taliban’s opponents especially the Afghan Northern Alliance forces, which for many years had been receiving all types of supports from Iran. Certainly, the Taliban did not leave Kabul merely due to the massive United States bombardments but the operations carried out by the Afghan Northern Alliance forces which had long been supported by Iran, forced them to retreat from the city.
As far as the regional affairs are concerned, Iran was a key factor in weakening the Taliban regime since, on the one hand, this country imposed political, economic and cultural pressures on the Taliban government and on the other hand coordinated with other regional actors including Russia and Central Asian countries.
Despite the recognition of the Taliban government by other regional actors such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, and even the United States’ tacit support, Iran has questioned the legitimacy of this regime in the international scene. However, Iran paid a price for adopting such a policy. The martyrdom of Iranian diplomats, increasing insecurity, and kidnapping along the Iranian border are among the consequences of that policy.
Internationally, Iran has also been working with the forces of the international coalition. Despite the direct presence of and threats posed by the United States through the eastern borders of the country, Iran not only accepted the presence of these forces but even in some cases, providing them with necessary information as well as supports in carrying out operations.
Undoubtedly, the “Bonn Conference,” which was served to lay the foundation for creating a new Afghanistan, neither would have been held nor would be fruitful without the constructive role of Iran. In this regard, we may take into consideration the vital role that Iran played in an effort to please the Afghan Northern Alliance forces and Mujahidin as the main conquerors of the war with the Taliban. Even after the establishment of the new Afghanistan and the end of the war, Iran supported the leadership of Hamid Karzai and a strong central government in order to weaken and eliminate remnants of Taliban and al-Qaeda. This has facilitated the process of Afghan refugees returning to their country and played an important role in the formation of the new Afghanistan as well as the process of state-building and nation-building through sending financial and logistical support along with operating the infrastructure projects in the Herat region including the important and strategic road “Herat-Dogharoun.”
Over the past seven years, Iran has been continuously and constructively supporting all political developments in Afghanistan, including the formation of the Loya Jirga, the constitution, presidential and parliamentary elections, and played an important role in the process of democratization in this country.
Iran’s Role in the New Iraq
First of all, the constructive role of Iran in the formation of a new Iraq can be evaluated on several levels. In the first place, while adopting an “active impartiality” policy, Iran played a key role in completing the regional blockade of the Ba’ath brigades. Despite the threats posed by the direct United States presence within the territory of Iraq, Iran not only supported the fall of the Ba’ath regime but announced that if necessary, it would even cooperate with the coalition of international forces for the benefit of the Iraqi people.
Over the past five years, despite the overwhelming operational capabilities of Iranian forces which had been developed due to their experiences of the eight-year war and the familiarity with the land of Iraq, Iran has never used its influence and operational capacity to spread insecurity with the aim of eliminating American threats. The reason is that any instability would end up with Iran facing negative consequences.
Second, Iran played an important role in stabilizing security and creating a balance in new Iraq through widespread and natural influence on the Shi’ah communities of this country. The political scene in Iraq over the years has been such that Shi’ahs, though they are a majority in the country, was not involved in central power. Nonetheless, the new situation provides a decent opportunity for different Shi’ah groups to emphasize their identity and existence for the first time and also paves the way for a balance of power taking place with respect to their rivals including Sunnis.
However, Iran’s constructive role in pursuing the policy of providing a balance in central power should be considered along with addressing the presence of all Iraqi political groups and identities. Iran has always tried to prevent instability in Iraq by maintaining the necessary grounds for developing integrity and stability through striking a balance between various political groups in Iraq. The effective role that Iran played in calming the Shi’ah movement led by Muqtada al-Sadr and subsequently surrendering their firearms and weapons is remarkable. Undoubtedly, such policy would prevent laying the groundwork for a civil war in Iraq.
Third, Iran has played an important role in the formation of the new Iraq by supporting and reinforcing all the developments and decision-making processes within the framework of state-building and nation-building. Among the first constructive measures of Iran is the recognition of The Iraqi interim government led by Ayad Alawi despite its strong dependence on the United States.
Iran backed such governance while the United States was strongly in need of securing stability in Iraq to eliminate the roots of terrorist operations. Iran has also played a supporting role in the process of holding the Parliamentary elections in Iraq, the formation of the Interim National Assembly of the country, and the Iraqi interim government, all of which were responsible for ratifying the constitution.
Iran’s constructive role becomes highlighted when this country, despite the natural attachment to the larger role of the Shi’ahs in new Iraq, began to support all political groups in terms of promoting equality in holding the parliamentary seats, especially the Sunni groups who had fewer seats in the parliament due to the lack of active participation in the general election during the transitional period of Iraq.
On the other hand, Iran has been involved and participated in all the regional and international conferences on the future of Iraq, including the important conference that was held in Cairo. Undoubtedly, Iran’s constructive role in creating stability in new Iraq, in the past, present, and future, is critical for preventing the spread of terrorist activities, because carrying out such operations through Iraq would jeopardize peace as well as the regional and consequently global security
.
The Contradiction of Roles: Reviewing the Current Roots of the Iran-United States Conflicts
Indeed, leading the war on terrorism by the United States and the international community after the attacks of September 11 has been met with little success since Iran had not been involved.
Despite playing a role in establishing peace and security throughout the region, the role that was given to Iran has not been in accordance with the country’s power, status, and dignity in the field of providing opportunities. In addition, Iran has been subjected to pressures and threats and even has been introduced by the United States as the “Axis of Evil.”
Like any other power and regional actor, Iran is a country that:
A) Has legitimate security concerns due to the expansion of instability around its borders;
B) Has a natural influence in terms of culture, politic and economy in the region;
C) Develops independent strategies of national security to protect its territory and combat foreign threats;
D) Has its own philosophy and worldview for taking roles, increasing its credibility and maintaining growth.
In fact, the root cause of the confrontation between Iran and the United States after the events of September 11 lies with the attempts made by a regional actor (Iran) to play a role in achieving its regional status to seize the political, economic and cultural opportunities of the region on the one hand and the endeavours of a global actor (the United States) to consolidate the regional hegemony to prevent Iran from playing a role in opposing the United States order in many ways on the other.
Given the history of hostility between Iran and the United States, Iran, like the United States, sees the increasing hegemonic influence of the United States in the region as a direct threat to its national security. Therefore, the conflict is rooted in “a sense of mutual threat” that exists among the two sides, which are trying to eliminate each other’s threat in various regional fields. In other words, in Iran’s view, since the Islamic Revolution, the United States has tried to disgrace Iran’s prestige by imposing economic sanctions and embargos, conspiracies and military threats, and has placed obstacles on the way of the development, creating opportunity and the increase of influence of the country.
On the other hand, in the eyes of the United States, the Islamic Republic of Iran is acting against the existing and United States-favored order of the region and its nature is considered to be a threat to regional and international security and hence should be prevented from increasing its economic, political and cultural influence. After the September 11 attacks, the conflicts that had been developed on the basis of mutual threat have been increased despite the common interests of the two countries in areas such as the overthrow of the Taliban, fighting against terrorism and Ba’athism and, in general, maintaining regional stability and security. The reason for such phenomenon is the efforts of both sides to further their engagements and reduce each other’s regional influence in an attempt to eliminate the threat that is posed by the other side.
The Logic of Iran’s Efforts to Play a More Influential Role
The characteristics and foundations of the power of Iran including geopolitics, population, energy resources, dynamic ideology, and, in general, economic, political and cultural capacities, will not be developed and implemented without taking a proper role in the regional and global scene. Since the emergence of the Islamic Revolution, the lack of taking a proper regional role and the restrictions imposed on the country with respect to its relations with its neighbours, have caused Iran to be deprived of various economic and cultural opportunities and compromised the entire process of comprehensive development of the country. The logic of Iran’s efforts to gain more roles may be illustrated within the frameworks of establishing security and creating opportunity:
Promoting Security
Like any other system, the Islamic Republic of Iran is sensitive to foreign security threats and naturally is doing its utmost to address and eliminate these threats in any way possible. The strategies of domestic development and adjusting foreign policy have always been based on security strategies and how to eliminate the threat because of the history of existing United States hostility towards Iran and the United States attempts to put pressure on this country. As a result, the political-security priorities continue to govern Iran’s international relations. Although, the United States has been posing threats to Iran since the occurrence of the Islamic Revolution in various forms such as leading coups, military invasion, supporting the Ba’athist regime during the war, imposing economic sanctions, etc., yet they have become more aggressive at the onset of September 11 incident. The direct military presence of the United States in the region and threatening to pursue the aim of changing governmental and political structures of Iran have now become more tangible and practical.
Over the past five years, Afghanistan and the new Iraq have turned into centers through which the United States exerts pressure and threatens the Islamic Republic of Iran
Creating Opportunities Across the Region
Like any other regional power, Iran has a natural cultural, economic, and political sphere of influence all around its borders and is trying to utilize such settings for creating opportunities. Since the advent of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the United States’ foreign policy has been focused on preventing the increase of regional influence of Iran. Such confrontation traditionally had been centred in the Persian Gulf region and the Arab and Muslim world in a manner that throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, Iran was identified as the root cause or source of the spread of Islamic fundamentalism and a direct threat to Arab regimes in the region and hence could not create opportunities.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States prevented Iran from expanding its sphere of influence and creating opportunities in cultural and economic fields across the northern regions of the country. Throughout the 1990s, the United States was determined to put pressure on Iran by supporting the governments in the region. The Iranian deterrence policies include preventing the expansion of the cultural influence of this country by supporting rival governments in the region such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia and reinforcing Israel’s role as a balancing force for Iran’s power in the northern regions.
With the onset of the events of September 11 and the United States presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, the scope of Iran’s involvement in the eastern and western regions has been limited. Currently, Iran’s demands to increase its regional roles may include participation in collective security arrangements in the Persian Gulf region and evolving the traditional definition of the balance of power, playing a role in the economic and cultural fields that exist within the regions around Iran around its borders especially the new Iraq and the sphere of influence of Shi’ahs both of which are regarded as the spheres of American influence.
For example, in terms of Iran’s engagement in the economic fields, one may mention the opportunities provided within the consumer markets of the region through the framework of meeting the domestic demands of Iranian merchants.
Interaction with international economic systems is another setting within which more opportunities would be created for increasing the role. The demands in this regard are more focused on the increasing domestic demand for progress and prosperity on the one hand and increasing the country’s international prestige and credibility on the other. Nowadays, the international economic system is governed by the laws and principles set by the main actors of the international order. These principles are used as a political tool to put pressure on states which oppose the existing order.
Over the past years, the restrictions and embargoes that have been imposed on Iran in an effort to disturb its interactions with the global economy on the one hand, and the imposition of direct economic sanctions by the United States on the other, have left little opportunities for Iran and consequently carried many costs for the economy of the country.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has a tendency to engage and being active in various economic, social and global arenas in order to meet its growing economic, social and cultural demands. For example, for many years Iran’s demands to join the World Trade Organization (WTO) were not accepted because of American opposition. Today, the international financial institutions are not interested to take out loans and would allocate fewer budgets to Iran under the pressure of the United States. Iran is deprived of participation in international and regional economic projects. Under the influence of existing sanctions, Iranian scientists and researchers are not able to present their scientific accomplishments. The international propaganda against Iran has reduced Iranians’ prestige and credibility. Finally, the role and position of Iran have been challenged and weakened.
Why The United States Seeks to Prevent Iran From Increasing Its Role
The United States’ demands are rooted in the perception that Iran poses threats to the regional order. The main challenge is that what is seen as a threat by the United States is regarded by Iran as an opportunity.
Therefore, the two sides have different perceptions in terms of threats and opportunities. The aims of the United States in preventing an increase in Iran’s role are as follows:
Iran’s Nuclear Program
From the perspective of the United States, Iran’s nuclear program is a serious threat to international peace and security. Therefore the United States exerts every effort whether through international pressure or military threats, to deter Iran from pursuing its peaceful nuclear program. The United States argues that first of all Iran is not in line with the policies of the international system and thus increasing Iran’s power can threaten global peace and security. Second, a nuclear Iran would intensify nuclear rivalry in the region, and thus the whole region enters an arms race that does not benefit the regional security system. Third, a nuclear Iran is a threat to Israel which is a strategic ally of the United States and would disrupt the balance of power across the region. Thus, the primary concern of the United States is the threat posed by Iran from various aspects or in other words the expansion of Iran’s roles.
In contrast, from the perspective of Iran, the continuation of peaceful nuclear programs is an opportunity which the country needs for its comprehensive development. Without a doubt, Iran’s pursuit of peaceful nuclear technology is not only a governmental matter but also a national demand and will. The foundations of power of Iran including size, population, wealth, human resources and expenditures (about $12 billion) would require that Iran takes this opportunity in an attempt to achieve developments and increase its regional and global power and prestige. Iran considers the United States’s threatening policy in this regard as a part of the United States policy to prevent Iran from playing a role and creating opportunity and eventually to weaken the regional and global position of this country.
Terrorism
Despite the constructive and effective role of Iran in combating global terrorism, especially after the events of September 11, the United States still believes that Iran is one of the main sponsors of terrorism. This argument revolves around Iran’s support of the Islamic movements of Hamas and Hezbollah and defending the rights of the Palestinians. In this context, the arguments of the two sides are quite opposite to each other. The United States considers the above-mentioned movements as terrorists and the main reason for the lack of progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. By contrast, Iran views such movements as liberation movements fighting for their freedom and independent destiny.
Over the past years, due to developments that occurred at the domestic levels and the power of these movements, as well as regional and global situations, the views of the two sides have been largely moderated, yet the fundamental challenge remains. Nowadays, Iran looks at the issue through the framework of existing realities and based on its national interests, and believes that no change would be made in the peace process unless the Palestinian side wants to do so.
The recent victories of Hezbollah and especially Hamas (January 2006) in the parliamentary elections of Lebanon and Palestine indicate that these movements are manifestations of people’s demands.
Regarding the issue of al-Qaeda terrorism, Iran argues that despite the constructive role that this country has been played in delivering several al-Qaeda leaders to host countries, but instead of appreciating the country for such activities the United States is spreading more and more global malicious propaganda and threats against the Islamic Republic Iran. The question raised here is that, in such a situation, why should Iran work in favour of United States regional policies in combating terrorism? Like other countries, the hidden presence of al-Qaeda has risks and costs for Iran. Given the fact that Iran is bordered by Afghanistan in the east and Iraq in the west, this Islamic country should be very careful about and aware of its policies in relation to this dangerous phenomenon.
The Presence and Influence of Iran in the Countries of the Region
Because the current United States administration perceives that Iran represents a threat to the United States, any increase in the influence and role of Iran throughout the countries of the region is regarded as unconstructive and an act of interference in the internal affairs of such countries and ultimately a threat to regional and global peace and security.
Over the past years, the United States has exaggerated the threat that Iran poses to its neighbours by various means and tried to use it as an instrument of pressure against this country on the international scene. From the point of view of the United States, two obvious examples of Iran’s increasing and interfering presence are Afghanistan and the new Iraq.
In contrast, it is argued that the role of Iran in these two countries is based on the cultural, religious, political and historical realities of the region and therefore should be seen in the context of creating opportunities by Iran rather than an attempt to threaten or interfere in other countries.
This phenomenon is taking place primarily due to the characteristics of the construction of power, politics and culture of such societies. For example, different Shi’ah and Kurdish groups in Iraq have somehow favoured the presence of Iran in Iraq’s power and political scene so that the balance would be maintained in central power which had been possessed by Sunnis for years.
Holding three rounds of direct talks between Iran and the United States on Iraq’s issues somehow reflects the importance of Iran’s role in the new Iraq’s political-security issues. Likewise, many Afghan political groups call for the presence of Iran in Afghanistan due to cultural and political affiliations with this country. Moreover, the presence of Iran in neighbouring countries and making an effort to achieve stabilization can be justified because of both creating opportunities and having legitimate security concerns.
Like any other regional power, Iran is worried about the hostile governments taking power in neighbouring countries. Historically, the territory of the neighbouring countries of Iran has always been used by hostile countries for undermining the Iranian government. This is especially important in the case of the new Iraq, given the history of enmity, hostility, rivalry and war on the one hand, and the presence of the United States in Iraq and posing threats against Iran on the other.
New Iraq: a Platform For Contradiction in the Roles
The events of September 11 have added to the importance of Iran’s role in regional stability and security. This is manifested in the new Iraq more than in any other place. The challenge of contradicting roles in Iraq is based on a simple fact: maintaining stability in Iraq is vital for the United States; Iran has a strong influence in Iraq; therefore, the United States needs Iran to maintain security and stability in new Iraq; and finally, employing and implementing the constructive and balancing policies of Iran in new Iraq would require the acknowledgment of the foundations of Iran’s influence and role not only in Iraq but also throughout the region. The main argument in this discussion is that, despite the constructive nature of the role Iran played in Afghanistan, Iran has not received adequate attention in terms of the regional policies and even new threats are being posed to its security and national interests. Therefore, Iran should be careful about how to utilize its superior regional privileges, especially in Iraq.
Undoubtedly, the top priorities of the United States foreign policy in the Middle East include the establishment of stability and security, and consequently gaining success in new Iraq from the internal, regional and international aspects. At the domestic level, as the American casualties increased in Iraq and the United States forces were failed to control the terrorist operations and the spread of insecurity, a sense of distrust has been developed in American public opinion over the ability of the Bush administration to manage the crisis. As a public-political culture, American public opinion is always sensitive to the Vietnamization of warfare
At the regional level, the United States foreign policy strategies for maintaining its strategic allies and balancing power between countries or pursuing projects such as the “Great Middle East” and implementing its basic principles such as democratization, paving the way for political, social and economic development in the Arab world and the region, all in all, would not be possible unless the United States efforts in Iraq meet with success. On the other hand, the failure of the United States to control the crisis in Iraq will undermine the United States’ position in the Middle East and the public opinion throughout the region.
Likewise, at the international level, the failure of the United States in Iraq would have adverse effects on the country’s global position. While claiming to be the only superpower in the world after the Cold War, the United States seeks to pursue its own new global order. Within such order, the United States government provides political and economic definitions of its rivals, including China and Russia in the political and military fields, the European Union in the economic fields as well as other powerful regional players, including India, Turkey, Israel and Iran. In the eyes of the neoconservative strategists of the Bush administration, the United States should prevent the increase of the scope and influence of the United States rivals such as the Islamic Republic of Iran even through military means. On the other hand, no country, as much as Iran, can play a stabilizing role in maintaining security and stability in Iraq. This is a fact that the American statesmen and strategists have fully acknowledged. A recent United States proposal for direct talks with Iran reflects the fact that Iran has widespread influence on the political scene of new Iraq. The significance of Iran’s role can be assessed from different aspects. First of all, Iran can play an active role in preventing the spread of terrorist operations by blocking the channels through which terrorists would infiltrate into the country as well as eliminating their logistical hubs. The terrorists’ ace in the hole is that all the time they are moving from one place to another. Hence, the Iranian forces can play an important role in stopping the terrorist operations due to their high operational capabilities which they had obtained during the Iran-Iraq war.
In addition, the influence of Iran on various Shi’ah political groups can be used as leverage for establishing stability and security. Although the Islamic Republic of Iran played a positive role in the process of the formation and consolidation of the new Iraq and mediated between different ethnic-religious groups on various occasions, yet Iran’s role has not been viewed positively and even it is identified as an interfering policy.
One of the main concerns of the international community is the expansion of sectarian warfare which would end up with the spread of insecurity and instability and a prelude to the breakdown of Iraq. As it has become apparent in recent terrorist cases that were carried out in holy shrines of Samara, Iraq has always had the necessary grounds for such conflicts because of its specific ethnic characteristics.
The al-Qaeda organization has repeatedly introduced the Shi’ites as the first-class enemy of the Sunnis and called for the formation of a sectarian war. In this regard, the Islamic Republic of Iran is playing a vital role in reducing tensions and calming the situation. Ultimately, while having an overwhelming influence on Kurdish political groups, Iran can play a constructive role in controlling radical forces. These forces are seeking independence and this would result in Iraq’s territorial disintegration, the spread of insecurity, and ultimately, the instability of the region.
The application of all the above points depends on the acceptance of a new regional role for Iran so that this country would be able to create opportunities in various economic, cultural and political spheres of its influence.
Certainly, Iran’s presence in new Iraq, which is the natural consequence of a historical, cultural and religious affinity between the two nations, is viewed as the expansion of the regional role and influence of Iran by the international and United States authorities and hence should be prevented because of Iran’s anti-American policies.
The main concern of the United States with respect to the continuation and expansion of Iran’s influence in new Iraq is the formation of a regional coalition between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the future Iraqi Shi’ah government which will bring inevitable geopolitical, geo-economical and geo-cultural impacts to the region. The features of such alliance include having access to all critical areas of the Middle East and consequently affecting the regional crisis, including the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and the Lebanese and Syrian issues, and holding about 30 percent of the world’s oil reserves along with enjoying a dynamic Shi’ah culture. Such features would be implemented through the framework of reinforcing a new type of democracy and its effects on the conservative governments of the region.
The existence of such unique features at one point altogether is definitely at odds with the wishes and intentions of the United States and the international system. For this reason, Iraq has become the new field within which the United States struggled to prevent the expansion of the regional role of Iran over the past three years. In other words, presenting Iran as an opposing force to establish stability and democracy in Iraq (while the establishment of democracy in Iraq would mainly benefit Iran since such phenomenon would lead to Shi’ahs gaining power), is an attempt made by the United States to prevent Iran from increasing its regional role and position.
Archive of The Enemies of the Islamic Revolution
leave your comments