Iran’s Emerging Foreign Policy

Meeting report

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
17 May 2000
IRAN’S EMERGING FOREIGN POLICY

Acting Chairperson: Ms N Magazi

Professor Mahmood Sariogahlan, Director Of Center for Scientific Research & Middle Eastern Strategic Studies in Tehran, first gave an overall perspective of the process of liberalization and reform in Iran.  In the quest for empowerment and an end to autocratic rule, the upheaval of 1979 was an extension of earlier challenges to the state’s central power: the 1905-11 Constitutional Revolution (that diminished the monarchy’s authority unsuccessfully ) and the nationalist rule between 1951-53 briefly forced the Shah into exile.  Both of these attempts were ultimately aborted. The 1979 revolution was also another attempt which resulted in the creation of a theocracy instead of a democracy.

The election of Khatami is a new attempt to purge the Iranian body politic of autocratic/theocratic rule and attempt to build a democratic society. The goal, says Prof Sariogahlan, is to institutionalize Western world ideas.  Ultimately there are conceptual and practical problems to create this democratic society.  The major issue is that Iran is rooted in centuries of authoritarian regimes.

Iran is the only Muslim country that has elections, partial government accountability, partial press freedom and paradoxically all of this liberalisation still creates clashes with the West.  Iran has multiple identities that are requiring resolution.  The result is a rift on all levels including that of Islam identity, Iranian identity or the infamous Western identity.  These are not unique. Many Arab countries suppress the surfacing challenges and create a national unity platform.  These are tensions that are facing Iran in its burgeoning liberalisation.  The challenge resides with the leaders of the county  who will need to focus not only on open dialogue with all levels of academia and media on these identity rifts, but maintain and promote Iranian economic and social development within its foreign policy.  Iran is moving in the right direction.  Yet, the historical challenge still remains: how to institutionalise these ideas despite the ancient  authoritarian culture.

Foreign Policy
The policies of former president Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani inadvertently jumpstarted the empowerment process and the election of President Khatami is the outcome. Since his election three years ago, moderate President Mohammad Khatami. has adopted a policy of opening up Iran to the outside world.  Iran is eager to promote relations with advanced cultural countries. Until 1995, Iran shared commercial relations with the US.  It was the advent of the DeMato Bill that terminated these relations.  Until the Bill, 35% of Iranian petroleum was traded with the U.S. Iran still enjoys 80% of its trade with Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Japan.  Iranian relations with the EU are expanding as well as with the Arab world.

There is a bilateral agenda for Khatami.  This includes expansion in the Arab nations and the international community at large predominantly the EU.  Iraq remains the national security threat because Iran only shares a cease-fire agreement. 

Iranian’s believe that American relations have changed somewhat in language, but commercial relations are still somewhat static.  At this time, economic sanctions are still in place.  Some sectors still believe that the U.S. is acting globally to demonize Iran.

Discussion
 (Q) Ms. F Mahomed (ANC) stated that some of the members of the committee recently made a trip to Iran and were thoroughly impressed with the women’s movement.  The major worry is that the reformation has recently been threatened by the higher council of clerics.  What power does this council have to halt reforms?  What is Iran’s influence in Central Asian republics?

(Q) Mr. M Pheko (PAC) asked how different Iran is today from the period of the ruling Shah and Khomeini.  Where does one draw the line between  homogeneity and diversity?  Is not the goal the acquisition of harmonious diversity.  The example is that of single language cultures that still do not experience homogeneity.   What are Iraq-Iran’s relations?  Isn’t Islam shared as a common identity strong enough to bridge the gap in Arab countries.  Do the Sunni and Shiite raise problems?

(Q) Ms F Hajaij (ANC) commended Iranian efforts at liberalization.   If it is not at conceptual level, could the indicators be extended?  How has Iran engaged with the larger global bodies like the IMF and the World Bank and the Security Council?

(Q) Dr P Jordan (ANC) stated that he would rather engage with the professor than ask questions.  He stated that he believed that the two had very different readings of the historical development of the reform movements.  He believed that the difference between the movements were led by secular leaders whereas, 1979 was led by clerics.  Doesn’t this color the character of Iranian consequences?   Perhaps the clerics are suppressing homogeneity.  National sovereignty has been a paramount issue for Iran after World War II.  Is the assertion of sovereignty emerging from Islam or Iran? How many parties participate in the elections and how freely do they participate?  Elections do not necessarily indicate liberalization.  What is the status of these imprisoned parties?  Addressing the issues of Iran-U.S. relations, South Africa can relate to the obsession with national sovereignty.  Perhaps Iran could do a little more to assist the softening of language abroad.

(Q) Is press freedom part of the liberalization?  How can this be explained in relation to the closing down of certain newspapers?

Response
(A) Number of women in the labor force is 33%.  They are present in all professions   There are two belief systems in the system.  Every reform movement has advocates that control the institutions. The Parliament is dominated by the thinking while the political/legal is dominated by another.  The increase in elections, the role of these institutions will be less controlled.  Mass politics litter into every institution.  Iranian influence in Central Asian regions in the past has been cultural.  Bilateral political relations are increasing in Tajikistan, however not as many would have expected.  The relations are not  promoted by Iranian domination.

(A)The process of the Constitutionalist movement of 1906 took a decade, and yet it was unsuccessful.  Iran is a very different place then the times of the Shah.  As an academic, freedom of discussion between students is better than that of any surrounding country.  My colleagues from the institution that I attended in the US were thoroughly impressed.  The worst realization, for my Professor from the states who came to visit, was that the media abroad has done a phenomenal job in demonizing Iran.  Iran has momentum, because Iranian’s have always resisted the government.  We hope that these ideas can be institutionalized.

(A) There is a lack of consensus surrounding what newspapers can and cannot discuss about top security issues.  The universities have always had an environment for dynamic movements, whereas the newspapers are still not established in these areas.  Security areas are conflictual issues.  The rules of the game have yet to be clarified.  There are still problems of opening limits of criticism and this is waxing and waning.  Theoretically, the question is to what degree can one institutionalize the methods of statecraft.  In what context are leaders immune from criticism?  Additional legal issues need to be addressed.

(A) The term homogeneity needs to be defined.  As an academic, I have been tossing around Political Science jargon.  Homogeneity does not apply to ethnicity.  It refers to the conceptual definition of a society.  Cultural diversity is recognized, yet a consensus needs to be addressed on the level of national strategy and platforms.  One major problem is the holistic issue of how to engage in a consensus building process?  This is the argument for nationalism.  It is the most potent force for building consensus.  Loyalty to the nation-state must be the most important sense to Iran in nation building and state building.   Where are your loyalties as citizen to a country?  This is why academics and journalists play a role within a dynamic dialogue with politicians.  Five years ago, Mr. Khatami called me and we engaged in a long discussion in rationalizing state behavior.  This is what I meant when I was referring to homogeneity.  Iran’s relationship with Iraq is very difficult because the problems run so deep between borderlines, POW’s, legal, historical, etc.  Iran’s policy is to avoid acting as an antagonist in Baghdad.  We still have no peace accord.  If there is a national emergency, there will be many levels to deal with, mainly because Iraq is a one-man show and this always implies danger.  It is not entirely in the hands of Iran to bridge the gap within the relations between Arab countries.  All countries are subjected to globalization.  There is no such thing as the Arab world.  Nationalism is on the rise and Islam has very localized definitions as economic issues become paramount religion will remain cultural.  The Middle East in the next 20 years will have a population of 100 million people.

(A) The indicators of liberalization are debates, critical discussions of foreign economic policy, and mayors are now being elected.  Iran is an ancient country. There has only been 20 years of serious reform.  Yet, we have had kings for centuries. The Bahaii’s in Iran are not just an Iranian governmental issue.  Many of these issues again, are cultural.  It is not just the state, the society has problems.  Any statesman that tried to normalize relations with Israel would experience social/cultural problems. Iran experiences active relationships with international organizations.

(A) The distinction between these movements was the clerics.  The 1906 movement in context was secular.  Marginalization was a problem.  It is true that the 1979 movement was led by clerics. I appreciate consideration in dealing with national sovereignty.  We really do not know how to formulate and draw boundaries between Muslim/Iran and Iran/Muslim.  The differences are between numerical and substantive.  One hundred and eight countries right now have elections in all areas (numerical).  seventy-eight have solid institutions.  There are many articles in Foreign Affairs that deal with the debate between numerical and substantive.  Iran is a numerical and the election of Khatami was a little more.  People were making a statement.  We have no defined parties.  We only have 6-7 groupings in Iran with worldview and strategies and policy preferences both clerical and non-clerical. The Dutuday party was financially backed inside Iran directly by the Soviet Union. Iran can do much better with its image.  There are major hurdles and weaknesses with organizational technicalities.  The diversification of foreign relations is the key to softening our image.

(Q) member asked if democracy was possible in a religious state.

(A) This is the main question with the political dilemma.  There are arguments supporting both answers.  One argument stands against the possibility and the other supports a patchwork approach.  We are still experimenting.  As much as I know, I think the philosophical answers are rather different.  there are moral dilemmas and there are issues of efficiency on a governmental level.  The debate will continue in Egypt and Saudi Arabia and Turkey.  The elite has had a lot of exposure and the pressure of economic development will play a guiding role.

(Q) Dr. Z P Jordan (ANC) stated his dismay with the professor’s attitude towards the Bahai religion.  In the spirit of Voltaire, the state should defend the individual choice no matter how controversial or small.  I am alarmed as well by your response to the issue of the Tudutay party.  I don’t think that the Tuday was an agent of Moscow. I know the leaders of this party and many of them were thrown in jails and were tortured.  It is your duty to defend the rights of the people.  To suppress them is highly representative of Iran’s older and deeper issues within the regime.

(A) It is not my opinion, it is a fact about the financial links.  The party has done quite a lot of harm to endanger the state of Iran with its operations.  Whoever disgraces my state, I am determined to speak against. 

Ms N Magazi closed the discussion with the remark that South Africa is still involved in redevelopment in terms of the global world. The meeting adjourned.