Iranian President Hassan Rouhani says a recent agreement reached between Iran and six world powers displayed the power of diplomacy in resolving international issues and disputes.
At present, the Islamic Republic of Iran and Saudi Arabia, due to their special potentials as two important and influential countries in the region and the Islamic world, enjoy necessary capacities to play this role. They can officially recognize their differences and think about necessary solutions to get out of the existing situation, because this will benefit both the two countries and the Islamic world on the whole.
The United States can begin with discarding its narrow-minded regime change policy and starting broad-based strategic cooperation with Iran. Iran is among the most important supporters of a Middle East free from nuclear weapons and has already indicated its willingness to take part in the formulation of an overarching arms control regime. These issues, along with fighting extremism, protecting stability of energy corridors in the Persian Gulf, and restoring stability to Syria, Iraq and Yemen, are good grounds for more profound cooperation between Iran and the United States. In that case, the United States will see that Iran is a much more responsible country than what the West believes today.
Iran's negotiations with the P5+1 countries and the resultant agreement has, for the first time in the history of international law, added a fourth option to the above three, which is to have the Security Council’s decisions abrogated through dialogue without the country in question having complied with them.
However, Russia has never tried to conceal its concern about the negative effects of possible improvement in Tehran’s relations with the West following a final nuclear deal. Among those negative effects, one may point out possible reduction in global oil prices, Iran's competitive presence in Europe’s energy market, reduced importance of Iran card in Russia’s bargaining with the West, reduced dependence of Tehran on Moscow, restrictions in the Iranian market for the activities of Russian companies, and possible increased permeability of geographical regions around Iran to the West, especially along Russia’s southern border. However, despite the fact that some of these untoward effects of Iran deal are objective, Russia maintains that realization of the fourth scenario will be more beneficial to its long-term interests, and its benefits outweigh its disadvantages.
Conclusion of the Iran deal after 13 years of crisis on July 14, 2015, has been a turning point in the achievements of global diplomacy in all aspects of diplomatic activities including bilateral, multilateral, media, public, soft, track two, and so forth, in the second decade of the 3rd millennium. Iran deal is a step forward in promoting the role of the Iranian civilization in global management and putting an end to the concept of the “axis of evil.”
Three years ago, when the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu displayed an imaginary map of Iran's effort to build nuclear bomb at the annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly to the attendees, he was not taken seriously by anybody, even his own American friends. At that time, some politicians told Netanyahu that “your time is over,” though he did not believe them.
The marathon nuclear talks between Iran and the United States have finally born fruit and the two sides reached a nuclear agreement on July 14, 2015. This development is considered a major turning point in history of Iran's relations with the United States subsequent to the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Therefore, Iranian leaders have described it as a point of departure which will lead to a thaw in bilateral relations between the two countries.
Seyyedeh Motahhareh Hosseini
Sanctions imposed on Russia will bring the country’s economy to a state of recession and standstill in the first place. However, from the viewpoint of politics and international system, Russians’ vengefulness cannot be easily ignored and their reciprocal response would be, most possibly, military and geopolitical in nature.
Waslat Hasrat-Nazimi responded to our questions about security in Afghanistan, the Afghan people’s sentiments about the continued presence of foreign troops in their land, opium cultivation, drone attacks and the domestic politics of the war-hit country.