Iranian Variable

Iran is a country of huge importance for geopolitical and energy reasons, first/second in the world in combined gas and oil reserves, although these are currently not fully exploited for various reasons. Located on the East-West and North-South fault lines, the geostrategic paths of Russia, China, and the US-led West converge at its borders. The official language is Farsi, but Azerbaijani (Turkish dialect), Kurdish, and Arabic are also widely spoken. Religions of the Book are allowed: Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, as well as Zoroastrianism, the rooted traditional cult of ancient Persia. With 85 million inhabitants, 50% under 30 years of age, 91% Twelver Shia religion, 50% Persian ethnicity (the rest are Azerbaijanis, Kurds, Arabs, Baluchis, Loris, Qashqais, Talyshs, Gilanis, and others), its hypothetical collapse would carry grave consequences, similar to those experienced on the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

In a highly unstable region we see the American Superpower as a factor of turbulence. The United States is following a strategy that can be described as follows: destabilizing countries that do not comply, dividing friends and enemies, selling weapons to anyone, keeping dollar and oil prices high, controlling energy flows. Iran is also the target of particular attention from the USA not only because is rich of energy resources, but also because Israel, its ironclad ally, views the Islamic Republic as a threat to its survival, although this is totally untrue, since it is Israel and the US together that are perceived by Tehran as an existential menace.

The Islamic Republic is a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and therefore subject to IAEA (1) inspections for possible deviations from civilian nuclear power (permitted by the NPT) to military nuclear power (not permitted). Among the countries that are not parties to the Treaty, in addition to North Korea (that withdrew in 2003), India, and Pakistan, we find Israel, that in line with the so-called nuclear ambiguity does not confirms or denies the possession of nuclear weapons, but it is credited with 150/200 nuclear warheads (2). Israel has also one of the most efficient armies in the world, constantly equipped by the USA. Iran cannot be compared (3), with the exception of the missile sector, which Tehran considers its main tool of deterrence. Moreover, unlike Iran, Israel is not party to the International Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), and to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). Therefore, any experiment in the relevant Israeli laboratories is allowed. Iran is the enemy of Israel and the United States, it funds Hamas (which, however, receives resources mainly from the Gulf monarchies), is an ally of Hezbollah, has normal relations with Egypt (which is hostile to Hamas and Hezbollah), supports the Houthis in Yemen, a country that Saudi Arabia is bombing almost daily with the support of the United States and some Gulf monarchies. Tehran is a friend of Damascus, which, in turn, is an enemy of Ankara. But Turkey and Iran are united against the Kurds, who are a destabilizing force for both countries. A few months ago, under the auspices of the People’s Republic of China, which purchases large amounts of oil from both countries to sustain its economic needs, Iran and Saudi Arabia restored diplomatic relations. Starting January 1, 2024, both Tehran and Riyadh will become members of the BRICS+ (now ten members), which will strengthen the energy dimension of the group.

In 2015, after lengthy negotiations with the G5+1 (USA, Russia, China, France, Britain, and Germany), the JCPOA (4) was signed, an agreement that expands IAEA control over the use of peaceful nuclear technologies. As stated by the IAEA, Tehran has fully respected the obligations of the agreement, that was sought by Barack Obama, but torn up by Donald Trump in 2018, and not renewed by Joe Biden, who, as Obama’s vice, had shared the opportunity to sign it. It is clear, here, that the. US Corporations of the military-industrial sector have prevailed over the financial and industrial corporations.

The prevailing view is that regime change will be a US strategic goal. However, this is unconvincing. In the first case, the US would largely invest in dialogue, trade, investments, scientific exchanges, tourism, and so on, and gradually the regime would change its skin and nature, distancing itself from its political/religious radicalism, finally even becoming conditionable in terms of political position and adherence to human rights.

By tearing up the Joint Plan of Action, the US confirms that it aims at something else: Iran must remain a fearsome enemy, under constant threat from the US and Israel, although this strategy becomes harder to pursue with its entry into BRICS (5) and SCO (6), where Moscow and Beijing are key-countries.

Tehran, on the other hand, does not want to fall into the trap by provoking its adversaries. Although it has condemned the Israeli massacre in the Gaza Strip, it has no intention of militarily intervening. Tehran’s intervention would have devastating consequences for the region (and the outcome of its implosion would be borne by Europe, certainly not by the US that is well protected by the distance), as well as for the Islamic Republic. A possible armed conflict with The US would bring a huge devastation of its territory and threaten the regime’s stability. Although an external attack would push the population towards greater unity, the Shia regime must not rule out that some sectors of the Iranian society (together with parts of the inner circles of the clerical and military power) might use this opportunity for a regime change, since most of the population is not happy and consider it an obstacle to the country’s progress.

Leaving aside the distracting hoaxes about democracy and human rights, worn-out instruments of the American unipolar egemone, Iran also serves as an additional alibi for American geopolitics for indefinitely postponing the key issue of Middle Eastern geopolitics, that is Palestine. Tehran’s military strategy is essentially defensive: among the countries or political groupings it can count on, the first is Syria, although the logic here should be reversed: it is Damascus needs Tehran, much more than the other way around, despite Tehran’s clear interest in setting up a base on the Mediterranean Sea, and in strengthening its links in Lebanon with the Party of God. Hizbollah by the way, like Hamas, has its own priorities that do not allow for an automatic submission to the Iranian political agenda.

Then comes Iraq, with a Shia but Arab majority (during the 1980s war, ethnicity prevailed over the common Shia faith), with a Kurdish component, a harbinger of potential contagion for Tehran as well, although so far under control. In turn, relations between Iran and Turkey remain strong, fluctuating among energy interests, common enemies, the mentioned Kurd issue, and different alliances, Assad for Iran and the United States for Turkey.

Nowadays, Tehran’s main allies are Russia and China, powers with extra-regional interests. These relations are consistent with Tehran’s current interests, but they are not without concerns, as the two nations are perceived with its historical propensity for infidelity (the former) and a pragmatism bordering cynicism (the latter).

For now, Tehran’s proximity to Moscow and Beijing is supported by the winds of realpolitik. The political cement that unites the three countries – at the bilateral level, as well as within BRICS+ and the SCO – is today the need to contain the American expansionism, which all three countries, for various reasons, perceive as a strategic threat.

Peace and stability for the Middle East would require that the United States (and other external powers) leave the region after convincing Israel to come to a historic reconciliation with the Arab-Muslim world by accepting the birth of an independent Palestine. At that point, the international community – the West led by the US, BRICS+, and the rest of the world – could try to put in motion a new phase, promoting economic and institutional progress under the auspices of the UN and its organizations (the only potentially neutral institution available on the planet), with the aim to promoting development, equality, and social justice.

A dream, of course, but often people tend to live on dreams more than on reality.

(1)International Atomic Energy Agency

(2)https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2023/10/14/news/israele_bomba_atomica-417798876/

(3)In 2022, according to SIPRI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_highest_military_expenditures), Israel would rank 15th in the world with spending of $23.4 billion, to which the huge weapons they regularly receive from the US should be added (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_States_military_relations), and Iran ranks 34th with $6.8 billion.

(4)Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action

(5)Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa

(6)Shanghai Cooperation Organization