“Hossein Mousavian on Iran and relations around the country,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, CCTV, May 22, 2015.
Tag: Middle East
Will Camp David spur regional cooperation?
President Barack Obama’s meeting with the Gulf Cooperation Council leaders at Camp David on May 14 looks by all accounts like a face-saving attempt by Washington. A well-publicized, high-wire meeting, verbal reassurances, perhaps promises of more political support and some advanced military hardware, that’s all. Nothing more can and should be expected; they simply cannot prevent the nuclear deal between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany (P5+1) from going through.
The invitation to Washington, in the statement right before the nuclear framework agreement with Iran was announced in Lausanne April 2, was apparently meant to reassure the Arab states in the Persian Gulf that the deal with Tehran did not mean their abandonment. The psychological-emotional aspect of the suggestion was more than obvious. Initial expressions of Arab dissatisfaction with the expected deal — and more importantly, its longer term implications of a possible Iran-US rapprochement — signaled knee-jerk reactions to the development, bound to have quite serious repercussions for everybody: the United States, Iran and its Arab neighbors on the southern shore of the strategic Persian Gulf and on a larger scale, the greater Middle East. That much is certain, even if the exact nature of future developments have yet to unfold and the emerging regional power calculus is inevitably different from what it has been since the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the onset of tension and animosity between Tehran and Washington.
“Will Camp David spur regional cooperation?” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, May 14, 2015.
Iran, a Deal Based on Dialogue Will be a Win-Win for Everyone
“Iran, a Deal Based on Dialogue Will be a Win-Win for Everyone,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, Marina Forti, Reset-Dialogues On Civilizations, April 17, 2015.
After nuclear deal, what’s next for Iran?
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.
“After nuclear deal, what’s next for Iran?” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, April 14, 2015.
There’s Common Ground For Final Nuclear Deal (Audio)
“There’s Common Ground For Final Nuclear Deal,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, Steve Inskeep, NPR, April 10, 2015. (Audio)
The road to peace between Iran and the West (Spanish)
“The road to peace between Iran and the West,” Hossein Mousavian, El Pais, April 8, 2015. (Spanish)
Iran Nuclear Framework Agreement
The National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations hosted a discussion on the newly-announced framework agreement between the P5+1 and Iran on that country’s nuclear program. The framework pushes Iran’s nuclear “breakout time” to at least a year and allows international inspectors access to Iranian programs deemed suspicious. ”Breakout time” refers to the time that it would take for Iran to acquire enough fissile material for one weapon.
The panelists talked about the specifics of the agreement. The also assessed the agreement’s implications for Iran’s regional neighbors and their relationship with the U.S., impact on the energy sector, and potential to be finalized by the June 2015 deadline. Speakers include Seyed Hossein Mousavian, the former nuclear negotiator for Iran.
“Iran Nuclear Framework Agreement,” National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations, April 8, 2015. (Video)
P5+1 & Iran: Report on the Ongoing Nuclear Talks (Audio & Video)
“P5+1 & Iran: Report on the Ongoing Nuclear Talks,” Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, April 2, 2015. (Audio & Video)
America’s Middle East Challenge
The Middle East is in dire need of cooperation on issues of long-term interest to the stability and well-being of the whole region. The Arab Spring has resulted in political instability in many countries, while extremist and terrorist groups have wreaked havoc across the region. It is imperative for Middle Eastern countries to work collaboratively in order to tackle these region-wide challenges.
The United States faces lack of trust from Iran and suspicion from its Arab allies. America’s oil-centered involvement in the Middle East is becoming less strategically important as the United States moves toward becoming the leading exporter of oil and gas. As a result, the Arabs are losing their oil leverage with Washington and are resorting to suicidal strategies to destabilize the region, by funding various extremist groups, in hopes that it would compel America to stay involved.
America’s increased involvement in the Middle East is inevitable as a result of the expansion of ISIS and other terrorist groups. This heightened involvement could result in positive outcomes if it is calculated carefully. The United States should come to the realization that its military might is not capable of bringing about peace in the Middle East. As Chas W. Freeman Jr. argued in his bookAmerica’s Misadventures in the Middle East, “How do we propose to manage the contradiction between our desire to assure the stability of the Persian Gulf and the fact that our presence in it is inherently destabilizing?” However, U.S. military superiority could be applied positively and used to support regional governments to fight terrorism in the region. Washington’s efforts toward a regional cooperation system in the Persian Gulf (akin to that of the European Union) would fill the vacuum caused by an eventual U.S. departure and assuage Arab fears of a resurgent Iran. President Rouhani, in his 2014 address to the UN General Assembly, pointed out, “The right solution to this quandary comes from within the region and regionally provided solutions with international support and not from outside the region.”
“America’s Middle East Challenge,” Cairo Review, Hossein Mousavian with Mehrdad Saberi. Published by the Cairo Review of Global Affairs, April 6 2014.
U.S. and Iran reach a nuclear deal
“U.S. and Iran reach a nuclear deal,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, CNN International, April 5, 2015. (Video)
