In other words, this expectation was
created that the new round of negotiations between Iran and six world
powers, unlike eight years ago, would transform from “inconclusive
ideological, philosophical discourse” in “an atmosphere of mutual
distrust” to “methodical, purposeful and timely diplomacy” in “an
atmosphere of mutual respect”.
In such an atmosphere, which is a result of the majority of Iranians voting for the new administration, Iranian diplomatic team sent a group of experts, Iranian diplomats with transparent and logical positions to New York and Geneva to announce the agenda of future talks to the other side - the agenda which must be implemented in a “specific timeframe” and lead to results and “specific achievements”.
Timeframe is between six months to one year and the expected results are:
1.Sep-by-step resolution of existing ambiguities and concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities in line with international rules and regulations within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s Safeguards, stripping the West of any pretext and dismissing accusations of the past, which hamper the possibility of mutual cooperation.
2.Recognizing Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities particularly its right to enrich uranium as well as legal measures to return Iran’s nuclear dossier from the United Nations Security Council to the IAEA Board of Governors in the first stage, and in the next stage, normalizing the outlook on Iran’s nuclear activities like other countries possessing peaceful nuclear technology and exiting it from the IAEA extraordinary meeting.
3.Halting the oppressive and illegal trend of different sanctions against Iran and in the next stage, lifting these sanctions within a specific timeframe and compensating for the damage incurred as a result of sanctions.
4.Normalizing the relations of Western countries with Iran in order to define different areas of cooperation in different fields particularly the economic and energy sectors
This form of cooperation has been defined based on the win-win model, given that Western hostilities towards Iran in the past years have been futile, the importance of economic and political situation in the Middle East and the importance of constructive and positive interaction with Iran, a relatively powerful consensus has been formed around Iran.
As expected, following this month’s Geneva talks, there were destructive and unrealistic reports in media affiliated to the anti-Iran front consisting of Western-Zionist radicals. The main point of these reports is that “Western countries should not allow the Islamic Republic to exit the economic siege and sanctions imposed against the country without paying a heavy price such as the complete halt of its nuclear activities and a lifting of sanctions should be a complicated and time-consuming process which [should take] nearly ten or more years [to be realized and should] appear impossible”. This hostile and arrogant approach by the West, which in Iranian and revolutionary lingo is considered as arrogant nature, maintains that “Iranians are willing to give the West more concessions in order for the Western sanctions to not be increased”.
These illogical statements become more considerable when media affiliated to the arrogant Zionist front quotes anonymous sources and the officials of the six world powers do not reject and confirm the existence of this dangerous scenario with their meaningful silence. Therefore it is necessary to warn the Westerns sides from a realistic position that if such a view exists among the countries negotiating with Iran or the members of the Western negotiating team and is not rejected by decision-makers in these countries, for a number of reasons they will lose the golden opportunity to negotiate with Iran and reach a sustainable and mutual agreement and secondly the irreparable harm resulting from such an approach cannot be undone for at least a decade.
These reasons are:
1.The US and its allies in recent years by defying all regulations and exerting their influence in certain international organizations have stopped at nothing in their animosity against Iran including taking measures such as assassination, sanctions and threats. Their ultimate goal has been regime change in Iran, which they have failed to achieve given the mass participation of Iranians in various elections. The principle of democracy in the Islamic Republic is the biggest political resource of the country, which prevents any all-out confrontation with Iran. Naturally, the continuation of this political-security confrontation will yield no results and its effectiveness will dwindle by the day and will draw closer to becoming neutralized because due to its past experiences, the Islamic Republic has achieved high defense capabilities in this regard. Therefore, as the proverb goes, a person in the hole stops digging and Westerners who claim to be using rationality in politics should not repeat their past mistakes.
2.Iran’s outstanding achievements in defense industries is very visible for the US and its allies and political pundits know that the cliché “all options are on the table against Iran” is merely a superpower gesture by the US and because US and its allies in the eight years of Iraqi imposed war (1980-1988) against Iran supported former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein with all their might and at the time Iran’s prowess was not comparable to present. Yet they could not achieve victory over the country. In a number of West’s proxy wars against Iran in Lebanon, Palestine and Syria, Western officials officially and publicly acknowledged that they are incapable of confronting Iran and the Islamic resistance inspired by the Islamic Republic. Therefore, the military option and threats is a big political bluff and indicates no intention to pelt.
3.Despite sanctions against Iran having created a number of problems in Iran but their effectiveness is becoming void because of solutions such as resistance economy and international relations. The continuation of sanctions will not meet the envisioned outcomes of the West and will only cause more loss of credibility of similar methods in international area.
4.For different reasons, particularly historical ones, powerful forces in Iran both in society and government are against any form of agreement, negotiations and compromise with the West and the Westerners. Without paying attention to the interests and damage inflicted by such possible agreements, they consider the essence of interaction with the West as unfavorable and resist against it. If today, Westerners see that these forces in society and government have only contented themselves with taking positions in the media due to the conditional and implied support of the highest political and religious authority in Iran - Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei who is the uniting factor of the Iranian nation and government. If for any reason, the Westerners fail to use this special opportunity to gain the trust of Iran, these accumulated forces opposing the policies of the Western governments will prevent any possible agreement with Iran in future.
5.There are reports that despite Iran and the world powers being engaged in the talks, these countries are independently trying to enter the lucrative investment projects in Iran in the new atmosphere brought about by the election and are competing with one another. Proof of this issue is oil giants trying to return to Iran’s oil and gas sectors and the British wanting to exchange charge d’affaires with Iran. Therefore, any defeat in negotiations will show the incompetence of Western governments in agreeing with one another to achieve a cooperation model with a regional power.
6.Ultimately, Westerners, particularly the US, must know that the experience of past years particularly after the fall of Saddam regime in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan which was only accomplished due to Iran cooperation and green light shows that no political, economic and cultural project can be implemented in the most important geostrategic and geo- economic region of the world, i.e. Middle East, without Iran’s cooperation and without taking into consideration the interests and security of Iran. The Islamic Republic has used the factors of soft and hard war and popular support to reach such a position. Therefore, if Western countries are incapable for any reasons to achieve an agreement and entente model based on mutual respect, recognizing Iran’s inalienable rights and ending hostile policies such as economic sanctions, the game will end win-lose instead of win-win in favor of Iran.
In conclusion, the Western parties particularly US and Britain must be advised to take their own interests in mind and use the unique opportunity in the new atmosphere with Iran and not allow pointless past animosities against Iran to continue as the Zionist circles are overtly and covertly dictating options on them.
هیچ نظری موجود نیست:
ارسال یک نظر