As tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran continue to escalate, who is to blame for the feud and is there an end in sight? In this episode of UpFront, a close ally to the Iranian president debates a former adviser to the Saudi royal family.
“Saudi Arabia vs Iran: Who is to blame for the row?” Al Jazeera Upfront, January 5, 2016.
Saudi Arabia started 2016 shamefully by carrying out its largest mass execution since 1980, putting 47 men to death on Jan. 2. Among them were at least four prominent Shia activists, including a leader of the kingdom’s Shia minority, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr. The killings have spurred a new round of tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the two regional powers.
“14 Reasons Why Saudi Arabia Is a Failed Mideast Power,” Hossein Mousavian, January 7, 2016.
Years from now, historians will likely look back at this period in American history as one of heightened prejudice amongst a significant portion of the public and shortsightedness amongst many political leaders. You do not even have to stretch the rhetoric of some Republican presidential candidates too much to spotmetaphors comparing Islam to Nazism! However, in this seeming contest to see who can be the most Islamophobic between the GOP presidential candidates, frontrunner Donald Trump has clearly outdone the rest.
“Targeting Muslims Is the Real Threat to Peace,” Hossein Mousavian, December 29, 2015.
Los atentados terroristas cometidos por el Estado Islámico (ISIS en sus siglas en inglés)en París y California han supuesto un antes y un después. Occidente tiene ya claro que no es posible contener al ISIS, sino que hay que derrotarlo de forma contundente. Pero hay que evitar tener una reacción desmesurada y contraproducente como la que provocaron los atentados del 11-S. La amenaza terrorista es hoy mayor que nunca. Ha llegado el momento de que las autoridades occidentales adopten estrategias nuevas y audaces, cuyo objetivo fundamental sea involucrar a todas las potencias de Oriente Próximo.
“Una estrategia sensata contra el ISIS,” Hossein Mousavian, El Pais, December 18, 2015.
Read More (English Translation)
On July 14, after 12 years of crisis and negotiations, Iran and six major world powers agreed on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which marked a peaceful settlement of the Iranian nuclear dispute. The JCPOA is the most comprehensive agreement ever achieved on non-proliferation; containing the most intrusive transparency and verification mechanisms ever implemented in the history of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). It shuts down all possible “pathways” to a nuclear weapon and prevents any potential covert weapons programs as well. There is no doubt that this agreement represents the most important diplomatic and non-proliferation achievement in several decades and that the global nonproliferation regime is stronger as a result of this deal.
“‘Coalition of the Coalitions’ Needed in ISIS Fight,” Hossein Mousavian, Defense News, December 13, 2015.
The former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw looks at the evolution of the West’s troubled encounters with Persia, and then Iran, from “Great Game” imperialism, through the 20th century politics of oil, to the recent stand-off over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
“Bridging the Gulf with Tehran,” BBC News, December 6, 2015.
The Pivot to Tehran
For more than four years, the Obama administration has accused Iran of being a chief instigator of Syria’s bloody conflict and has rebuffed persistent appeals by the U.N.’s top peacemakers, who maintained that any durable political settlement would be unthinkable without granting the Islamic Republic a seat at the table. The price of a ticket to peace talks, the State Department long insisted, was an unequivocal commitment from Tehran to endorse a U.N.-brokered peace settlement resulting in a political transition and the departure of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power.
“The Pivot to Tehran,” Foreign Policy, October 29, 2015.
“Russia Entry Adds New Fuel to Syria War,” Yaroslav Trofimov, The Wall Street Journal, October 1, 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.
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
