Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif contributed this essay to the May/June 2014 issue of
Foreign Affairs: "What Iran Really Wants: Iranian Foreign Policy in the Rouhani Era."
* * *
Foreign policy is a critical component in the lives, conduct, and
governance of all nation-states. But it has become even more significant
in recent years as interstate relations have grown ever more complex.
The inexorable rise in the number of international players -- including
multilateral organizations, nonstate actors, and even individuals -- has
further complicated policymaking.
Meanwhile, the ongoing process of
globalization -- however conceived and defined, whether lauded or
despised -- has brought its inescapable weight to bear on the foreign
policies of all states, whether large or small, developed or developing.
Since its establishment by a popular revolution in 1979, the Islamic
Republic of Iran has grappled with these challenges. The
postrevolutionary foreign policy of Iran has been based on a number of
cherished ideals and objectives embedded in the country’s constitution.
These include the preservation of Iran’s independence, territorial
integrity, and national security and the achievement of long-term,
sustainable national development. Beyond its borders, Iran seeks to
enhance its regional and global stature; to promote its ideals,
including Islamic democracy; to expand its bilateral and multilateral
relations, particularly with neighboring Muslim-majority countries and
nonaligned states; to reduce tensions and manage disagreements with
other states; to foster peace and security at both the regional and the
international levels through positive engagement; and to promote
international understanding through dialogue and cultural interaction.
IRAN IN THE MULTILATERAL ERA
Since the end of the Cold War and the demise of the bipolar world in
the early 1990s, the global order has undergone a major structural
transformation. But a firm new order has not yet emerged. As was the
case during other transitions in the past, the fluid, complex, and
uncertain state of international affairs today is extremely perilous and
challenging. Previous transitions were usually complicated by military
rivalries and even outright war among the dominant powers of the time.
Today’s rivalries are similarly quite intense. However, due to a number
of factors -- the substantially changed global environment, changes in
the nature of power, and the diversity and multiplicity of state and
nonstate actors -- competition these days mostly takes a nonmilitary
form.
The concept of power itself, traditionally measured in terms of
military might, has changed substantially. New forms of influence --
economic, technological, and cultural -- have emerged. Concurrently,
changes at the conceptual level have brought the cultural, normative,
and ideational components of power to the fore, making power more
accessible to a larger pool of actors. Moreover, the gradual rise of
multilateralism in the wake of World War II has elevated the importance
of international norms and consensus.
Despite such substantial changes in the architecture of the world
order, remnants and beneficiaries of the old order have tried to
salvage the wreckage of the past. During the late 1980s and early 1990s,
the emergence in the United States of apocalyptic theories declaring
“the end of history” or a “clash of civilizations” represented a hasty
reaction to the enemy vacuum created by the end of the Cold War and to
the rising status of Muslims on the global stage. Through a series of
subsequent Islamophobic campaigns -- sometimes promoted as official
state policy and perpetuated systematically in various forms and guises
-- some in the West tried to depict the Islamic community as a new
ideological enemy on a global scale.
But rather than experiencing a divergence, the world is now moving
toward a state of mutual interdependence. Contrary to the situation in
the past, the pursuit of go-it-alone policies by former hegemons or
current powers has led to a state of impasse and paralysis. Today, most
nation-states, regardless of their size, power, influence, or other
attributes, have come to realize that isolationism, whether voluntary or
imposed, is neither a virtue nor an advantage. Collective action and
cooperation have become the hallmarks of the era.
Multilateralism, the collective search for common solutions to common
problems, has proved its desirability and practical efficacy at both
the regional and the global levels. Even major world powers have learned
the hard way that they can no longer pursue their interests or achieve
their particular goals unilaterally. The gradual yet growing trend of
coalition-making, at the regional and global levels, both for short-term
purposes and for more enduring enterprises, bears witness to the
inescapability of collective action. Willful cooperation has gradually
developed as a new working pattern of interaction among states; it has
come to replace the once predominant and now discredited pattern of
confrontation, unconditional subservience, and perpetual rivalry.
As an inevitable consequence of globalization and the ensuing rise of
collective action and cooperative approaches, the idea of seeking or
imposing zero-sum games has lost its luster. Still, some actors cling to
their old habits and habitually pursue their own interests at the
expense of others. The insistence of some major powers on playing
zero-sum games with win-lose outcomes has usually led to lose-lose
outcomes for all the players involved.
The much-challenged position of the United States in the world today,
notwithstanding its preponderance of military power, is a glaring case
in point. The actual situation in various parts of the world where the
United States is directly involved, most notably in the greater Middle
East and in Iran’s immediate neighborhood, points to Washington’s
reluctant but unmistakable turn to the path of coalition building with
other global powers and even regional actors. China, India, and Russia
are engaged in intense competition, primarily with the Western bloc, in a
concerted effort to secure more prominent global roles. However, major
powers and emerging powers alike are now loath to use military means to
resolve rivalries, differences, or even disputes.
This has led to the gradual rise of a revisionist approach to foreign
policy. Nation-states, regardless of their current position and power,
now seek to enhance their stature and achieve their goals through a
carefully balanced combination of cooperation and competition. The
deadly rivalries of the past, a function of brute force and hard power,
have gradually given way to cultural, normative, and ideational forms of
competition. The uncertainty produced by the current transition in
global norms and behavior also has a downside. If states miscalculate
their own power or misperceive the capabilities and intentions of
others, it could prove extremely costly to all involved. The intrinsic
riskiness of this state of affairs calls for governments to rely on more
objective analysis and to make careful assessments of their own
positions and capabilities as well as of the intentions and possible
conduct of others.
All states can take advantage of this transitional stage to advance
their positions and further their interests. Governments must make
realistic calculations about their own relative advantages and
vulnerabilities and, most important, articulate clear sets of objectives
and plans. Over the past few decades, especially since the end of the
Cold War, states that have pursued clearly articulated foreign policies
have been the most successful in advancing their regional and global
positions; those that have lacked an understanding of the global
environment and pursued policies based on miscalculations and
misjudgments have either lost their previous positions or become
marginalized.
FULFILLING IRAN’S POTENTIAL
As a solid regional power in this era of intense transition in global
politics, Iran stands in a unique position. Given its large landmass
and unique geographic position along the east–west transit route, Iran,
since antiquity, has enjoyed a preeminent position in its region and
beyond. Although Iran’s civilization and cultural heritage have remained
intact, its political and economic fortunes have fluctuated
periodically, depending on, among other things, its governance at home
and its relations with the outside world. The victory of the 1979
revolution, a popular, nationwide, antimonarchical uprising with a
mixture of republican and Islamic traits, contributed to the
establishment of a new revolutionary order in the country. The
repercussions were drastic, and the revolution deeply affected the
country’s foreign relations, not only in its immediate neighborhood but
also throughout the greater Middle East and in the rest of the world.
Any objective analysis of Iran’s unique attributes within the larger
context of its tumultuous region would reveal the country’s significant
potential for a prominent regional and global role. The Islamic Republic
can actively contribute to the restoration of regional peace, security,
and stability and play a catalytic role during this current
transitional stage in international relations. In light of the
increasing importance of normative and ideational factors in global
politics, the Islamic Republic is well suited to draw on the rich
millennial heritage of Iranian society and culture and the significant
heritage of the Islamic Revolution, particularly its indigenously
derived and sustained participatory model of governance. Iran can use
such strengths to help realize the deeply cherished national aspirations
of the Iranian people, including the achievement of long-term
development and regional ascendance commensurate with the country’s
inherent capacities and stature.
Iran also benefits from a number of historical characteristics
that could be considered unique sources of opportunity, many of which
have not been properly or fully leveraged in the past. For example, Iran
has remained independent from outside powers and practiced genuine
nonalignment, lending it a particular freedom of action within the
existing global order. Iran can also leverage its political traditions.
It has successfully established an indigenous democratic model of
governance, developing and maintaining a rare religious democracy in the
modern world. It has an unmatched cultural identity emanating from its
dynamic blend of Iranian and Islamic culture, which it can use to
promote its mission and message throughout the entire Islamic world. As
an ancient society with a plurality of ethnic, religious, and linguistic
minorities, Iran also offers a model for political inclusion. And the
country has achieved all of this at the center of a vital geostrategic
region that has witnessed a long history of major-power rivalries,
interventions of all sorts, and protracted military conflicts. Finally,
Iran has also demonstrated its potent ideational capabilities and
universal reach through such initiatives as President Muhammad Khatami’s
“Dialogue Among Civilizations” and President Hassan Rouhani’s recent
proposal for a “world against violence and extremism,” which was adopted
as a resolution by the UN General Assembly last December.
Governance in the modern world is challenging for every state,
regardless of its size, demographics, form of government, geographic
position, level of development, or relations with the world. Iran has
been an organized state since antiquity, albeit with some periods of
interruption. It has thus had extensive relations throughout history, in
war and in peace, with its numerous neighbors and with other contending
powers. It has accumulated a rich, layered collective memory and a deep
reservoir of experiences. Iran borders seven countries and shares
access to either the Caspian Sea or the Persian Gulf with 11 countries;
both bodies of water are of interest to the littoral states as well as
to a host of outside powers. Thus, Iran inevitably has a full plate to
deal with when it comes to its national security and foreign relations.
Iran also finds itself in a fundamentally crisis-ridden region. The
decades-long occupation of Palestine and the ongoing conflict there has
taken a destructive toll on the well-being and development of the entire
Middle East. The chronic turmoil, instability, and violence in the
region have grown worse in recent years due to a series of protracted
external military interventions, most notably in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Since early 2011, political upheavals in the Arab world and their
generally bloody aftermaths -- dubbed by some during their initial
stages as “the Arab Spring” and by others as “the Islamic Awakening” --
have introduced another destabilizing factor to the region. The trend
appears likely to continue for quite some time, even though the
direction of the process remains extremely uncertain.
Given this overall regional picture and the dynamics at work between
local and external players -- most prominently the United States -- Iran
today has to grapple with a number of major challenges in its external
relations. Needless to say, the long shadow of the decades-old and still
ongoing tussle between Iran and the United States, which has been much
exacerbated as a result of the nuclear imbroglio, has further
complicated the state of relations between Iran and a host of its
neighbors. Meanwhile, there has been a recent surge in the activities of
extremist and violent nonstate actors in countries such as Afghanistan,
Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria, with a clear and unmistakable anti-Iran,
anti-Shiite platform. A well-orchestrated campaign has promoted
Islamophobia, Iranophobia, and Shiite-phobia and depicted Iran as a
threat to regional peace and security; extended support to anti-Iran
claimants in the region; tarnished Iran’s global image and undermined
its stature; armed Iran’s regional rivals; actively supported anti-Iran
forces, including the Taliban and other extremist groups; and fomented
disagreements between Iran and its neighbors.
MODERATION AND HOPE
It was within this international context that Rouhani won a decisive
victory in the heavily contested Iranian presidential election in June
2013. He won 51 percent of all the votes cast in the first round against
five conservative rivals. His political platform of prudent moderation
and hope represented a significant turning point in Iranian politics.
The fact that voter turnout reached 73 percent suggests that the public
had moved past the lingering divisions of the June 2009 election.
Rouhani’s pragmatic positions on foreign and domestic issues proved
reassuring to the Iranian electorate. Rouhani distinguished his campaign
from the murky platforms of his rivals in several key respects: his
clear analysis of Iran’s current situation, his lucid and unambiguous
articulation of the major challenges facing society and the state, and
his honest and straightforward approach to problems and possible
solutions. In this way, Rouhani managed to mobilize the disenchanted
segments of the population to take an active interest in the final days
of the campaign and to participate in the national vote.
Rouhani’s foreign policy platform was based on a principled, sober,
and wise critique of the conduct of foreign relations during the
preceding eight years under the previous administration. Rouhani
promised to remedy the unacceptable state of affairs through a major
overhaul of the country’s foreign policy. The changes he proposed
demonstrated a realistic understanding of the contemporary international
order, the current external challenges facing the Islamic Republic, and
what it will take to restore Iran’s relations with the world to a state
of normalcy. Rouhani also called for a discourse of “prudent
moderation.” This vision aims to move Iran away from confrontation and
toward dialogue, constructive interaction, and understanding, all with
an eye to safeguarding national security, elevating the stature of Iran,
and achieving long-term comprehensive development.
Prudent moderation is an approach based on realism, self-confidence,
realistic idealism, and constructive engagement. Realism requires an
understanding of the nature, structure, mechanisms, and power dynamics
of the international system and of the potential and limits of its
institutions.
Rouhani’s moderation brings together a profound conviction
in the cherished ideals of the Islamic Revolution with an objective
evaluation of Iran’s actual capacities, capabilities, and constraints.
It demands a deliberate aversion to actions that are insulting,
condescending, or self-aggrandizing. It promotes self-confidence based
on an understanding of Iran’s material and moral resources, including
the collective wisdom of its citizenry. It values accountability,
transparency, and honesty in dealing with the populace and implies a
willingness to reform and improve existing policies. Rouhani’s approach
entails a delicate balancing act: between national, regional, and global
needs, on the one hand, and the available means, instruments, and
policies, on the other; between persistence and flexibility in foreign
policy; between goals and means; and among various instruments of power
in a dynamically changing world. Finally, Rouhani’s commitment to
constructive engagement requires dialogue and interaction with other
nations on an equal footing, with mutual respect, and in the service of
shared interests. It requires that all participants make serious efforts
to reduce tensions, build confidence, and achieve détente.
A WAY FORWARD
Guided by this conceptual framework, the foreign policy of the
Islamic Republic under the current administration will be based on
achieving understanding and consensus at the national level and
constructive engagement and effective cooperation with the outside
world. Iran’s policies will be guided by the principles of dignity,
rationality, and prudence. This overall strategy aims to safeguard and
strengthen Iran’s national security, diffuse or eliminate external
threats, combat Islamophobia and Iranophobia, elevate the country’s
stature, and achieve comprehensive development.
With the Ministry of Foreign Affairs serving as the central organ for
planning and executing Iran’s foreign policy, in close coordination
with other government bodies, the Islamic Republic will pursue several
key goals moving forward. First, Iran will expand and deepen its
bilateral and multilateral relations through meaningful engagement with a
wide range of states and organizations, including international
economic institutions. Multilateralism will play a central role in
Iran’s external relations.
That will involve active contributions to
global norm-setting and assertive participation in coalitions of
like-minded states to promote peace and stability. A second priority
will be to defend the individual and collective rights of Iranian
nationals everywhere and to promote Iranian-Islamic culture, the Persian
language, Islamic values, and Islamic democracy as a form of
governance. Third, Iran will continue to support the cause of oppressed
people across the world, especially in Palestine, and will continue its
principled rejection of Zionist encroachments in the Muslim world.
Given the pressing challenges that it faces today, Iran will also
focus on a number of more urgent aims. The top priority is to diffuse
and ultimately defeat the international anti-Iranian campaign,
spearheaded by Israel and its American benefactors, who seek to
“securitize” Iran -- that is, to delegitimize the Islamic Republic by
portraying it as a threat to the global order. The main vehicle for this
campaign is the “crisis” over Iran’s peaceful nuclear program -- a
crisis that, in Iran’s view, is wholly manufactured and therefore
reversible. That is why Rouhani wasted no time in breaking the impasse
and engaging in negotiations with the so-called P5+1 (China, France,
Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, plus Germany) to find
common ground and reach an agreement that will ensure nonproliferation,
preserve Iran’s scientific accomplishments, honor Iran’s inalienable
national rights under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and end the
unjust sanctions that have been imposed by outside powers.
Iran has no interest in nuclear weapons and is convinced that such
weapons would not enhance its security. Iran does not have the means to
engage in nuclear deterrence -- directly or through proxies -- against
its adversaries. Furthermore, the Iranian government believes that even a
perception that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons is detrimental to the
country’s security and to its regional role, since attempts by Iran to
gain strategic superiority in the Persian Gulf would inevitably provoke
responses that would diminish Iran’s conventional military advantage.
Therefore, the ongoing negotiations over the nuclear issue face no
insurmountable barriers. The only requirements are political will and
good faith for the negotiators to “get to yes” and achieve the objective
established by the Joint Plan of Action adopted in Geneva last
November, which states, “The goal for these negotiations is to reach a
mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure
Iran’s nuclear programme will be exclusively peaceful.” The unexpectedly
fast pace of progress in the negotiations so far augurs well for a
speedy resolution of this unnecessary crisis and for the opening up of
new diplomatic horizons.
Iran will also endeavor to diffuse external threats by resolving
outstanding issues with the rest of the world, in particular with its
immediate neighbors. Confidence building and cooperation will be the
cornerstones of Iran’s regional policy. That is why last year, Iran
proposed the creation of a security and cooperation arrangement in the
Persian Gulf area. As a responsible regional power, Iran will actively
participate in combating and containing extremism and violence through
bilateral, regional, and multilateral cooperation with countries in the
region and beyond.
Moreover, Iran will prudently manage its relations with the United
States by containing existing disagreements and preventing further
tensions from emerging unnecessarily, thereby gradually easing tensions.
Iran will also engage with European countries and other Western states
with the goal of reinvigorating and further expanding relations. This
normalization process must be based on the principles of mutual respect
and mutual interest, and it must address issues of legitimate concern to
both sides. Iran will also expand and consolidate its amicable ties
with other major powers, such as China, India, and Russia. As the chair
of the Non-Aligned Movement until 2015, Iran will reach out to emerging
powers of the “global South” and will try to responsibly mobilize their
enormous potential for contributing to global peace and prosperity.
The Iranian people, with their massive turnout in last year’s
presidential election and their decisive choice of assertive engagement,
have provided a unique window of opportunity for the new Iranian
government and for the world to chart a different and much more
promising course in our bilateral and multilateral relations. The
Islamic Republic of Iran is determined to vigorously honor its citizens’
choice, which will undoubtedly have a tremendous impact on world
affairs.
For this endeavor to succeed, it is imperative for other states to
accept the reality of Iran’s prominent role in the Middle East and
beyond and to recognize and respect Iran’s legitimate national rights,
interests, and security concerns. It is equally important for other
states to scrupulously observe the sensitivities of the Iranian nation,
particularly regarding its national dignity, independence, and
achievements. Westerners, especially Americans, need to modify their
understandings of Iran and the Middle East and develop a better grasp of
the region’s realities, avoiding the analytic and practical mistakes of
the past. Courage and leadership are required to seize this historic
opportunity, which might not come again. The opportunity must not be
lost.
* * *
