Articles

Articles, Publications

Is Iran really to blame for Yemen conflict?

Posted on

The deaths of at least 1,000 Yemenis, including 115 children, and over 3,500 injuries has seemingly been the main result of the Saudi-led military strikes against the country. The conventional wisdom of these attacks on Yemen has been that it is the latest battlefield in a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Such portrayals of the conflict often frame Iran as the aggressor, parroting claims that Saudi Arabia’s intervention in Yemen was somehow forced due to Iranian meddling in its backyard. However, such assertions ignore not just the realities of Yemen’s internal politics, but also more than a little bit of history.

As the Yemen attack shows, Saudi Arabia’s regional strategy is bent on using Iran as a scapegoat to justify its ownaggressive policies. These policies appear geared at maintaining and expanding uncompromising Saudi hegemony across the Arabian Peninsula and the Middle East. However, by aiming to preserve authoritarian governance in Yemen and further marginalizing vast segments of Yemeni society, Saudi Arabia is only damaging its own interests and opening the door for violence to spill over into its own territory. The Saudis should be cognizant that, just as it is with other crises in the Middle East, the only solution to the Yemeni conflict is a political solution based on addressing the concerns of all parties involved.

 

“Is Iran really to blame for Yemen conflict?” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, May 8, 2015.

Articles, Publications

After nuclear deal, what’s next for Iran?

Posted on

After more than a decade of roller-coaster talks, mostly marked with failure, both sides have finally arrived at a formula that would assure the international community of the strictly peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear activities, and terminate all unilateral and multilateral economic and financial nuclear-related sanctions imposed on Iran.

While the political framework reflects the commitment, hard work, sound judgment and, above all, political will of all the parties involved — Iran as well as and the United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China and Germany — it has been the direct interaction between Iran and the United States, the main two protagonists, particularly since September 2013, that has helped steer the process of negotiation toward the positive outcome. In a detailed discussion in my book “Iran and the United States: An Insider’s View on the Failed Past and the Road to Peace” — covering more than 30 years of deeply felt and entrenched mutual distrust, hostility, name-calling, tension, tit-for-tat negative policies, measures and actions aimed at harming the other side — I have tried to depict an objective picture of the state of relations, or lack thereof, between the two capitals, including the numerous missed opportunities at rapprochement and ultimate detente between them. This particular aspect of the matter has not escaped the attention and eyes of pundits and keen Iran observers, including William Burns who has been personally involved in the nuclear talks for years.

 Read More

“After nuclear deal, what’s next for Iran?” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, April 14, 2015.

Articles, Publications

How to Fix the Syrian Mess

Posted on

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.

Read More

“How to Fix the Syrian Mess,” Hossein Mousavian, The National Interest, March 24, 2015

Articles, Publications

Seventeen points to know about Netanyahu

Posted on

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.

Read More

“Seventeen points to know about Netanyahu,” Hossein Mousavian, Gulf News, March 16, 2015.

Articles, Publications

On Iran deal, Republicans cut off their nose to spite their face

Posted on

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.

Read More

“On Iran deal, Republicans cut off their nose to spite their face,” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, March 11, 2015.

 

 

Articles, Publications

Iran nuclear talks: The 5 options for what happens if they fail

Posted on

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.

Read More

“Iran nuclear talks: The 5 options for what happens if they fail,” Hossein Mousavian, The Telegraph, March 3, 2015.