Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a former Iranian diplomat and newspaper editor, said the West had come to a “better understanding of Syrian crisis” and no longer opposed Assad but was now “convinced he is a part of solution”.
“France jockeying for Iranian business after nuke deal,” Hjer M’tiri, AA, January 26, 2016.
Le président iranien Hassan Rohani est arrivé à Paris le 27 janvier. Cette visite marque le début d’une nouvelle ère des relations politiques et économiques entre les deux pays. Les conséquences d’un approfondissement de leurs liens se feront sentir au Proche-Orient et en Europe. Reste à savoir si ces pourparlers directs entre les présidents français et iranien déboucheront sur une relation solide et durable entre Paris et Téhéran.
“L’Iran d’Hassan Rohani est une chance pour la France,” Seyed Hossein Mousavian, Le Monde, January 27, 2016.
When the nuclear negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 world powers kicked off with renewed hope after Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s inauguration in August 2013, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quick to endorse the diplomatic efforts but also stressed that the “U.S. government is not trustworthy.” Indeed, the main impediment to normal relations between Iran and the United States since the 1979 Islamic Revolution has been the mutual mistrust between the two sides. Iran, for its part, has a long list of legitimate grievances. The U.S. supported Saddam Hussein in the conflict that began with his invasion of Iran in 1980, sparking an eight-year war that cost the lives of over 300,000 Iranians and resulted in an estimated $1.19 trillion in damage to both sides. During the war, the Iraqi army used chemical weapons against Iran, killing and injuring over 50,000 civilians.
“America needs Iranian cooperation,” Seyed Hossein Mousavian, USAToday, January 14, 2016.
“In the end, it is the U.S. which should ultimately decide whether they want to take advantage of economic relations with Iran or not,” says Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a research scholar at Princeton and former Iranian ambassador to Germany.
“Why U.S. businesses could lose big in Iran,” Heather Long, CNN Money, January 11, 2015.
With the ongoing domestic in-fighting in the United States and Iran over the nuclear deal — which has already become legally binding by way of a U.N. Security Council resolution — it has become clear that Congress poses the biggest risk for the deal falling through. Congress’s ability to play a spoiler role comes not only from the power it has to scuttle the deal altogether but also from its efforts at fostering an uncertain atmosphere regarding the removal of sanctions on Iran.
The effectiveness of the nuclear deal will rely largely on the P5+1 instilling confidence in the global business community that sanctions have been removed and the country is open for business. Truly removing sanctions in a way that would have tangible benefits for Iran would require shaping expectations in such a way that businesses do not feel their investments are precarious and susceptible to the political machinations of Congress or a future U.S. president.
“A rejection of the nuclear deal could lead to radicalism in Iran,” Hossein Mousavian, The Washington Post, August 28, 2015.
“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.
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.
“US-Iran relations and the nuclear issue,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, Kayvon Afshari, American Iranian Council (AIC), March 11, 2015. (Video)
“Nuclear deal with Iran gets closer as Netanyahu comes to Washington,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, Carol Morello, Washington Post, February 27, 2015.
“Parl. Speaker warns US against new sanctions against Tehran,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, PressTV, January 24, 2015. (Video)
