Iran has downplayed a vote at the US House of Representatives to bar the American government from purchasing heavy water from Iran in the future.
As the process of US presidential election in 2016 becomes finalized and on the run-up to NATO’s forthcoming summit in the Polish capital, Warsaw (July 8-9, 2016), NATO’s approach is shifting from assuring its partners with regard to Russia to deterrence-like moves in the face of this actor. Based on the cycle of about four decades of developments in NATO-Iran relations, and due to new strategic turn in NATO’s international approach, Iran's position and its geopolitics are now in focus of attention and are becoming more important to the Western front in its effort to conquer new regions by expanding eastward and finally disintegrate Russia.
The reality is that given the internal power struggle in Saudi Arabia, and in view of the falling oil prices in international markets and the ensuing economic crisis that has engulfed the Saudi royal court, and also due to the ongoing unrest in the Middle East, Riyadh is currently facing a serious crisis; a crisis which has been made even worse through a change in Washington’s foreign policy priorities.
Iran and India are two important and effective countries in West Asia with common bilateral, regional and international interests and more proximity between positions and viewpoints of these two major Asian powers can have many benefits for the international system under the current hectic political conditions in the world.
Turkey is the sole country in the region through whose cooperation it would be possible to tone down and even totally defuse psychological operations and propaganda that aim to fan the flames of Shia-Sunni war. If we managed to do away with the notion of Arab-non-Arab war during the Iraqi imposed war on Iran through cooperation with Syria as an Arab country, Tehran-Ankara axis can now play the same role and thwart the operations launched to foster a war between Shias and Sunnis.
Mohammad Ali Dastmali
The question is “when there is talk about Kurds objecting to Sykes-Picot’s approach to borders and political structure in the region, does it represent the dynamic and consolidated demands of all Kurds in the region?” The answer is no, because unlike past decades, Kurds, and in clearer terms, Kurdish parties in four countries of Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Syria, are not of the same opinion when it comes to necessity of independence and secession, and establishment of a common geographical unit.
In fact, the main demand and intention of the United States is to make sure that the Taliban would not be able to pose a serious challenge to the central government in Afghanistan and won’t be able to set up a central government of its own. On the other hand, the Americans don’t want the government of Afghanistan to have such a powerful army and military force that it would be able to either destroy the Taliban or make them accept peace with the government.
Mohammad Ali Dastmali
Of course, even if Davutoglu had continued as the leader of the ruling party and the prime minister of Turkey, he could not have found a way to get Demirtas and other figures involved in peace talks, but he could have brought trusted Kurdish and non-Kurdish figures to talks in order to convince the PKK to totally withdraw its forces from Turkey. Now, however, conditions have drastically changed and Erdogan, along with the prime minister who would succeed Davutoglu, will stop at nothing less than disarming the PKK.
On the prospects of Iran-UK relations, Mr. Alderdice says he has been encouraging collaboration and the improvement of bilateral ties between the two countries and hopes Iran and Britain can work together as two committed business partners, even though they can “disagree respectfully” on matters of contention. He noted that even though Tehran and London have been successful in diffusing tensions, there are people in Britain who don’t understand the diversity and “depth of culture and intellectual power” in Iran and still push for enmity with the Islamic Republic groundlessly.
The US Supreme Court has handed down a ruling based on which about 2 billion dollars of Iran's frozen assets will be paid as remuneration to families of Americans killed in terrorist attack on a US Marines base in Beirut in 1983. Two points are worthy of mention here.