TEHRAN (Basirat)- Whether in the theoretical basis, the strategic horizons or on national policy level, it is not possible to detente and end conflicts with the hegemonic system.
Whether in the theoretical basis, the strategic horizons or on national policy level, it is not possible to detente and end conflicts with the hegemonic system.By Dr. Ali Hassan Heidari
Nowadays, months after nuclear negotiations (JCPOA), analysts are focusing on the future of Iran and West relations and especially on Iran’s relationship with the U.S. particularly due to the theory that believes the nuclear talks were only a start point to detente and end the conflict between Iran and U.S. In order to answer questions like: "is really the nuclear talk the first step to reach to a constructive engagement with the US?” and "determine whether following this path can help to the ending of conflicts and hostility??” This article tries to answer the questions through 3 stages of analysis.
1. Official and Macro Policies of Government
As it is mentioned and emphasized in the official positions of Islamic Republic of Iran, the last negotiations were exclusively on "Iranian Nuclear program” and no other plan was made to negotiate on other subjects in the talks, including regional, internal issues and so on.
In determining the policies of government, the Supreme Leader of Islamic Republic of Iran emphasized that negotiations with European and American Officials, were only a negotiation for nuclear talks and not on any other issue. "Everyone should know this. We do not negotiate with America on regional issues. America’s goals in the region are the exact opposite of our goals. We want security and peace in the region. We want the rule of peoples over their countries. America’s policy in the region is to create insecurity.”
Referring to the regrettable conditions in some regional countries such as Egypt, Libya and Syria, he reiterated: "Arrogant governments – headed by America – have begun a counterattack against Islamic Awakening, which was created by nations. This counterattack is continuing in the present time and it is gradually creating a disastrous situation for nations. This is their goal, which is the exact opposite of ours. We do not at all negotiate with America, neither on regional issues, nor on domestic issues, or [sic] nor on the issue of weapons. Our negotiations with the Americans are confined to the nuclear issue and on how we can reach an agreement through diplomacy".
According to the logical principles of governance, all executives should act based on framework of policies that has been officially declared.
2. Conflict on Strategic Objectives
Even if the official policies of Islamic Republic of Iran did not point to the negotiations with United State in non-nuclear issues, a little bit of thinking about current situation and facts between Iran and U.S would clear the answer. In the regional changes, there are two main axis (actors) in particular: the first one is the axis of resistance which Islamic Republic of Iran is the main core. On the other side is the Hebrew - Arabic – Western axis which is supported openly or covertly by America, Europe and Israel that is already about igniting the entire region with their policies. US and its allies, Sometimes, in the form of proxy war through CIA/Wahhabi mercenary army misleadingly titled the "Islamic State” (ISIS) and sometimes in the form of Saudi regime’s military intervention in Yemen against helpless people. In confrontation to plots created by this dominant axis, Islamic Republic of Iran is the only country in the region that stands firmly with oppressed people and supports the resistance movement. Nevertheless, Iran well-proved its capabilities in this unequal battle.
In short, in such situation that both sides (Iran and West) find themselves at an impasse when there are no overlapping interests and as a matter of fact nothing in common, negotiations on regional subjects means senseless. In this condition, having negotiations between Iran and West on regional subjects is a great advantage for the West, in turn will have consequences and no benefits for Iran.
3. Discursive - Epistemic Struggle
Despite political issues in which conflict between Iran and West is obvious, it’s advised to those who are seeking to detent between Iran and West and alleviate their conflicts that they need to understand the root causes of the conflict between Islamic Republic of Iran and hegemonic system and also this origin is not only on political issues, but also it is on Discursive – Epistemic basis and origins of thoughts. The imperialist west is founded based on arrogant man, whose endless hedonism leads him to dictatorship on the oppressed nations in the form of colonialism, neo-colonialism, and ultra-new colonialism and he is going to enslave the modern human. But the Islamic Revolution is based on Islamic Discourse of religion (Islam), invitation to worshiping God, unleashing of humankind from dictators, imperialists, and demons.
It's notable to state that all of the above mentioned are not just a bunch of discourse – idealistic subjects, and in fact the difference between origins and cognitive perspectives is the main reason behind Islamic Republic of Iran and hegemonic systems conflict. Is west capable to change its theories and stop bullying poor nations?
It is worth noting said Imam Khomeini: "Some spiteful individuals are describing and taunting us as engaging in the policy of hatred and vengeance in the world gatherings. With their inappropriate sympathies and childish protests, they are saying that the Islamic Republic has been the source of hostilities and that it has been looked down by the West, the East and their allies! How good it is that this question be responded thus: ―At what particular period that the Third World and Muslim countries, the Iranian nation in particular, have been respectable and creditable for the Westerners and Easterners that today they have become non-creditable?!‖
Yes, if the Iranian nation would deviate from all Islamic and revolutionary principles and standards and be destroyed by its own hands the house of honor and respect of the Prophet and infallible Imams (peace be upon them).Then the world-devourers will not possibly recognize it officially as a weak, poor and uncultured nation.
To the same extent that they would be considered gentlemen, we are servants; they are superpowers while we are weak; they are lords and guardians while we are stipendiary and protectors of their interests. If the control and call for elimination of destructive weapons in the world were true and sincere, it would be the wish of all nations. However, this is yet another old trick.” (Sahife Imam, Vol. 21, Pp. 90 and 91).
In summary, the origins of conflict between Islamic Iran and domineering west is not shallow, simple, pointless or non-significant and we cannot be such naive that we can think with just one negotiation on one specific issue we can overcome the entire hostility. On the other hand, the strategic objective of both sides in different levels of national, regional and international has nothing in common, therefore detente is not an option.
In conclusion, according to the three levels of analysis above, it can be summed that in the entire three stages (i.e. theories, strategies, national policies) generalization of results for detent and ending the conflict with the hegemonic system is not possible.
Based on this fact, campaign and struggle against arrogant powers and hegemonic system in general is one of the tenets and essence of the Iranian revolution and is not stoppable.