The New World Order

Monday, May 24, 2010

Ali Akbar Abdolrashidi

Active ImageIran has been an important hub of the history and geography of the past 100 years. Some historians maintain that the World War II came to an end after the Allied leaders met in Tehran and decided to use the country as a “victory bridge” to get supplies to Leningrad frontlines.

If this assumption were true, it would follow that the post-World War II bipolar world system was not actually born before Potsdam Conference (1945) or even before conclusion of the North Atlantic Treaty (1949), but it was conceived in Tehran, in December 1943. Of course, Iran played no role in the establishment of that system and just served as a venue for related talks.

By irony, the first instance of military occupation under the bipolar world system occurred in Iran by the Allied forces, which also triggered subsequent indirect confrontation between the superpowers; a phenomenon which was later known as the Cold War. Subsequently, the Red Army occupied parts of north and northwest Iran to the proximity of Tehran with UK and US occupying other parts of the country.

The last war of the Cold War era also took place in Iran. The eight-year Iran-Iraq war was somehow continuation of the same scenarios which had already led to the military occupation of Iran. This was why both eastern and western powers and their regional lackeys lined up behind Saddam as they knew that triumph of Iran would effectively challenge unjust international relations.

Iran, however, won that war and challenged the unjust international system. It was Iran and its zealot young combatants that finally imposed their will on the powers supporting Saddam who represented all their subservient regional allies.

The liberation of Khorramshahr on May 24, 1982, was, in fact, resurrection of the Iranian self-reliance. Freedom of Khorramshahr marked the birth of a new Iran with new coordinates of rationality, determination and faith. From that self-reliance originated many later political developments both in and out of Iran.

Tehran has been recently the scene of a new dramatic political event with Iran playing the main part.

It will be no exaggeration to say that the declaration signed by Iran, Turkey and Brazil as prelude to a new formula for the exchange of nuclear fuel between Iran and seller countries has taken all international media by surprise.

The role of Brazil and Turkey in Iran’s nuclear case is of multifaceted importance.
Firstly, their two-year membership in the United Nations Security Council conveys a clear message. The trilateral declaration has shown the world the reality of the existing trust between Muslim countries (Iran and Turkey), on the one hand, and non-aligned countries, as well as south-south and developing states, on the other hand.

The development also proved that countries, which interact on the basis of mutual respect for one another’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence, are in a better position to take advantage of recognized diplomatic and legal means to solve their own problems and settle disputes of international import. The recent Tehran Declaration was, in fact, harbinger of a new and more efficient world system.

Following the implosion of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the end of the Cold War, the United States alleged to be the leader of a unipolar world system. Some European countries also claimed their share of the new system and formed an alliance which is now called 5+1.

Still sticking to their past imperialistic habits, their approach to regional and international issues was based on traditional methods including the threat of force and sanctions, which has caused the current situation in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the world.

The military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and confrontation with Iran over its peaceful nuclear program emanate from hegemonic approach to international relations by that power block.

Many other countries, however, believe in a multipolar system which will assimilate more countries in international decision-making process. Advocates of this system pursue the rule of justice and rationality over international relations.

Assuming that Tehran Declaration would fail to achieve its goals due to obstructive attitude of eastern and western powers, it would still constitute an important and valuable precedence in international relations. If regional powers were smart enough to choose for synergism and cooperation, they would be able to impose their will on the victorious powers of the World War II.

Active ImageThe new era of international relations will not exactly correspond to the definition conceived by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. What NATO looks for is unrivaled reign of five victorious powers of the World War II which still sway veto power at the United Nations Security Council. A new and powerful determination, however, is currently making its way through the mainstream of international relations and is fueled by regional and emerging world powers.

The Non-Aligned Movement was born in the context of the Cold War, but has been practically stalled during the entire years that have elapsed since its establishment. If the recent agreement in Tehran could serve as role model for members of Non-Aligned Movement or other regional and international movements and alliances, then potentials of such political currents could be put into force.

Let’s not forget that since its birth in Bandung, in 1955, the Non-Aligned Movement has been missioned by its four basic principles to prevent war and foster dialogue, diplomacy and peaceful coexistence. Tehran Declaration will, in fact, relive the Movement by pushing new blood into it.

What happened in Tehran on Monday, May 17, 2010, seems to be the rise of a new framework for international relations which can be prelude to a new multilateral system based on south-south cooperation. Iran, Turkey, and Brazil will be forerunners of the new system.

The main challenge in international arena is about establishment of a new system of international relations whose repercussions will follow in the coming months or years. The supporting role of south-south and all other developing countries will be of grave importance to continuation of the new process and perhaps the Security Council is a suitable ground for this challenge.

Source: Ettelaat Newspaper
Translated By: Iran Review