Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says Iranian officials must stand firm on the country’s stance during nuclear negotiations with the P5+1 countries to secure the nation's interests.
By creating panic and fear through aimless and savage massacre of people, ISIS is trying to strip regional people and their leaders of rationality and replace it with a sense of vengeance. Regional countries must take steps toward resolution of the crisis and know that taking retaliatory measures without accurate calculations will only help perpetuate and expand the crisis and will put those countries on a path, which is only desirable for ISIS and its international backers.
Despite different interpretations of regional stability and Iran's hegemonic role in the Middle East by Iranian and American sides, and despite various interpretations of and expectations from important international institutions such as the United Nations Security Council, the Iran deal will remain gravitational center of differing views and strategic and security-based challenges in the two countries’ future relations.
As was predicted from the very beginning, the recent meeting between the US President Barack Obama and heads of state from the Middle East Arab countries in Camp David, Washington, ended on May 15 with participants putting emphasis on the need to face Iran “threat” and Tehran’s efforts to “destabilize the region.”
Diplomatic measures taken by Iran in the past few months on the initiative of the Islamic Republic of Iran have changed the false image that had been projected of Iran as an “actor that undermines security.” As a result, and on the strength of the new political capacities of the country and also because of its geographical position and cultural and civilization background, the way is now paved for Tehran to play its role as an actor that “fosters security” taking into account that for Asian countries, security is meaningful in three military, economic and political fields.
A recent meeting between the US President Barack Obama and heads of the member states of the (Persian) Gulf Cooperation Council [(P)GCC] in Camp David, Washington, was wrapped up without Arab participants of that meeting obtaining strong security guarantees from the United States.
On the whole, one can daresay that although the idea of Silk Road Economic Belt has drawn a lot of attention in Iran, there are also many ambiguities still surrounding this idea. The important point, however, is that Iran looks upon this initiative as a strategic opportunity. Iran is among countries that are not very much concerned about China’s ambitions and basically consider further growth of China’s power as an opportunity, not a threat. Therefore, technical dialogue between the two countries on the details of the Silk Road Economic Belt initiative and Iran's position in that initiative is necessary in order to dispel current ambiguities and promote cooperation between the two sides.
Although these changes have had a major effect on domestic policy of Saudi Arabia, no essential change has taken place in terms of Saudi government’s position on a spectrum which extends from democracy to totalitarianism. In addition, although foreign policy of Saudi Arabia has altered its direction in accordance with the aforesaid changes toward cooperation with the Muslim Brotherhood in the region, the main priority of this country – which is to counteract Iran's regional power and influence – has remained unchanged.
Since domino-like popular uprisings started to sweep through Arab countries, regional developments moved in a direction that has prompted regional countries to seek security and stability in the face of escalating instability and shaky nature of the existing conditions. As a result, every regional country was looking for a companion and partner to form an alliance, so that they could keep their heads above the choppy waters of the region. However, after the beginning of the crisis in Syria, conditions in the region took a different turn and groupings among various political forces, both with and against one another, became more transparent and clearer.
On the relations between Iran and Turkey as two major economic and political powerhouses in the region, Prof. Turan opines that the two nations have never been on fighting terms, and despite intrinsic rivalries, they have tried to keep their competitions under control. According to Prof. Turan, Iran and Turkey have disagreements over Syria or Yemen, but this doesn’t mean that they can’t benefit from what cooperation might offer.