“The road to peace between Iran and the West,” Hossein Mousavian, El Pais, April 8, 2015. (Spanish)
Articles
How to Fix the Syrian Mess
The bloody conflict in Syria since early 2011—whether we call it a civil war or by any other name—has brought in its wake actual disaster with vast destruction of the country and its infrastructure and over 200,000 dead, 6.7 million internally displaced, 3.8 million refugees and 13 million people in need of urgent humanitarian assistance.
Staffan de Mistura, the third in a series of United Nations envoys tasked to find a solution for the Syrian conflict, has introduced an “action plan” aimed to make 2015 the year in which movement toward a political settlement of the conflict takes place.
As things stand, and given the factors that pushed the previous efforts and initiatives, including Geneva I and II, to failure, success of the new plan proposed by UN special envoy depends on a much larger political orchestration. As I see it, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5) and the five relevant regional players—Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Saudi Arabia/ GCC and Egypt (R5)—should adopt a fresh look and approach to the Syrian crisis. Overall, agreement on the following steps could pave the way for an exit from the current deadly impasse.
There are six steps that must be taken.
“How to Fix the Syrian Mess,” Hossein Mousavian, The National Interest, March 24, 2015
حسین موسویان: مذاکره‌کنندگان از هر زمان دیگر به توافق نزدیک‌ترند
مذاکره‌کنندگان از هر زمان دیگر به توافق نزدیک‌ترند – حسین موسویان – صدای ایران – دوشنبه ۳ فروردین ۱۳۹۴
It is crucial that Iran and the US cooperate
“It is crucial that Iran and the US cooperate,” Hossein Mousavian, El Pais, March 17, 2015. (Spanish)
English version: “The nuclear talks and the cost of sanctioning Iran,” Hossein Mousavian, IRNA, March 18, 2015.
Seventeen points to know about Netanyahu
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s histrionics in the US Congress on March 3 was an implicit effort to overturn US foreign policy and goad Washington into a disastrous war with Iran. Riddled with misinformation and outright conspiracies about Iran’s nuclear programme and Iranian foreign policy, his attempt at undermining the Obama administration has thus far only served to reveal to the world how little he cares for the best interests of the US in the Middle East. “I was near tears during Netanyahu’s speech to Congress — saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said after the speech.
The New York Times said of Netanyahu on March 5: “Netanyahu has always been an abrasive and unhelpful figure. In the George H.W. Bush presidency, James Baker was so fed up with Bibi that he banned him from the State Department building.” After Netanyahu’s address to Congress, President Barack Obama also stated that “there was nothing new” presented and that the Israeli PM “didn’t offer any viable alternative” to a peaceful diplomatic settlement with Iran.
The truth is there are many benefits to a US-Iran rapprochement. As US Secretary of State John Kerry has said, Iran and the US have ‘mutual interest’ in fighting Daesh a group that is clearly the biggest threat to international peace and security today. Iran is in fact now a leading force in helping Iraq defend its territorial integrity against the onslaught by the self-proclaimed “Islamic State” terrorist group. A nuclear deal will help the US and the world powers start exploring other possibilities for cooperation with Iran such as in preventing Iraq and Syria from completely falling apart, and even in efforts to stabilise Afghanistan. And these would only be for starters. The US and the world powers should not let Netanyahu to kill this chance.
Here are 17 points to understand about Netanyahu.
“Seventeen points to know about Netanyahu,” Hossein Mousavian, Gulf News, March 16, 2015.
On Iran deal, Republicans cut off their nose to spite their face
The partisan struggle in the political corridors of Washington reached unprecedented heights this week, with Iran becoming the focal point for fierce contention between Republican members of Congress and the Barack Obama administration. The latest display of these sharp internal divisions over the Iran talks has come from a provocative letter by 47 Republican senators to the Iranian government. The letter marks a direct interference by US legislators in the negotiations, with senators such as potential 2016 Republican presidential candidates Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul co-signing the message that purported to emphasize the innate fragile nature of any would-be agreement with Iran. However, in their desperate attempt to dissuade Iran from reaching a deal, the Republicans have harmed US credibility on the international stage more than they know, or perhaps even care to understand.
“On Iran deal, Republicans cut off their nose to spite their face,” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, March 11, 2015.
موسویان درباره سردار سلیمانی چه گفت که «بی‌بی‌سی»سانسور کرد؟
موسویان درباره سردار سلیمانی چه گفت که «بی‌بی‌سی»سانسور کرد؟ – حسین موسویان – آنا – سه شنبه ۱۹ اسفند ۱۳۹۳
Iran nuclear talks: The 5 options for what happens if they fail
As Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, prepares to criticise President Obama’s nuclear talks with Iran in a controversial address to Congress on Tuesday, those negotiations have been making unprecedented progress.
It is realistic that an agreement will be reached by the end of March deadline: Iran has been willing to accept restrictions on its nuclear programme which ensure that it is verifiably transparent and which cut off all potential pathways to developing a nuclear weapon.
If, however, political pressure, whether from Israel or Congress, leads to a failure to reach any kind of nuclear agreement by the end of March, then negotiators will be faced with five options.
“Iran nuclear talks: The 5 options for what happens if they fail,” Hossein Mousavian, The Telegraph, March 3, 2015.
Would Iran deal set new nuclear proliferation standard?
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, arrived in Geneva Feb. 21 to hold bilateral meetings with US Secretary of State John Kerry and US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz. Hossein Fereydoun, President Hassan Rouhani’s senior adviser, is also accompanying the Iranian negotiation team to facilitate consultations and coordination. This is the highest level of talks between Iran and the United States since the 1979 revolution. The nuclear talks between Iran and the world powers are at a most critical moment — and in their final phase — and the chance for a final deal is likely more than 50%.
Recently, Henry Kissinger, the former US secretary of state and national security adviser whose knowledge of national security matters is often viewed as paramount in certain Washington circles, has attempted to cast unwarranted criticism on efforts to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the Iranian nuclear dispute. “The impact of this approach will be to move from preventing proliferation to managing it,” Kissinger said of the ongoing diplomatic efforts. “And if the other countries in the region conclude that America has approved the development of an enrichment capability within one year of a nuclear weapon, and if they then insist on building the same capability, we will live in a proliferated world in which everybody — even if that agreement is maintained — will be very close to the trigger point.”
Kissinger’s assessment reflects a beleaguered understanding of the current status of the nuclear negotiations and the history of Iran’s nuclear program, as well as the realities of the current international system in regard to nuclear proliferation.
The key to understanding the nuclear proliferation issue is to have a firm grasp of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) that has as its goal reducing the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, as well as nuclear weapons disarmament on behalf of the nuclear weapons powers.
Over the years, many nations signatory to the treaty, on both sides of the nuclear weapons divide, have been in technical violation of their obligations under the NPT. There have been at least five states — Brazil, Argentina, Egypt, South Korea and Taiwan — that have engaged in clandestine nuclear programs without notifying the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The nuclear weapons states, too, have oftentimes been negligent in their obligation to dismantle their nuclear weapons and in many cases have actually upgraded their warheads and increased their number. In the case of Iran, there has also arguably been a significant double standard.
“Would Iran deal set new nuclear proliferation standard?” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, February 22, 2015.
36 years after the revolution, where is Iran now?
The Iranian nation toppled the US-backed Pahlavi regime in 1979, ending virtually 2,500 years of monarchical rule, and will see nationwide rallies on Feb. 11, the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. In the 36 years since mass protests deposed the monarchy in Iran, the country has struggled with immense challenges. After the Islamic Republic’s establishment by way of a popular referendum, Iran endured a period of chaotic instability, with various armed factions seeking to undermine the nascent government.
Yet, despite all of these crises, Iran has persevered. It emerged from the Iran-Iraq War without giving up an inch of its soil in spite of the all-out support given to the aggressor by the superpowers and even regional Arab countries. It also did this without resorting to the use of chemical weapons, even as it had the capability to do so, as the country is signatory to all weapons of mass destruction conventions. Iran has since managed to become one of the rare countries able to maintain its political-security independence and foster an atmosphere of socio-economic self-reliance in a nation that was once so incredibly dependent on outside powers.
“36 years after the revolution, where is Iran now?” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, February 11, 2015.
