There is a prevailing feeling that Iran wants someone to save it from itself, not from Arabs or the West. Iran’s problem is within Iran itself and not outside its borders. This seems to have been signaled by Foreign Affairs Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who said: “I confirm to you that because of these negotiations (with the P5+1 group) the Islamic Republic of Iran has become safer. No one can any longer beat the drums of war against the Iranian people. The hostile atmosphere created against us has fallen through.”
Let’s take a look at Iran from this perspective of self-imprisonment. The Iranian regime has for a period of over 30 years placed itself in a corner and locked itself in a box with slogans, political relations and stances. It has imprisoned itself, its leaders and its mind in this corner at a time when the entire world around it was changing. Iran is based on a model that is closer to Communist China and the Soviet Union. China has gotten rid of its Leftist, Soviet clothing and invented a new regime with a new face. Meanwhile, Basij militias and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards continued to guard ideas and punish whoever opposes them.
Do Iranian leaders really want to exit the prison they inherited from the revolution? Is Iran really looking forward to openness? Are its negotiations with the West over uranium enrichment and harmless nuclear energy a mere appeal for help to catch up with a world, which has changed a great deal?
Zarif has not clearly stated that Iran wants to change but he did say that his country feels safe because of negotiations and that Iran feels proud that the P5+1 group sat down with it to negotiate ending the state of continuous war. If the minister and the regime feel as such, then what will happen later if an agreement is reached and the confrontation, which lasted for 30 years ends? The regime’s discourse — which mirrors that of the revolution — is theoretically built on confrontation and sacrifice. But in case of a nuclear agreement, this revolutionary discourse will be left outside the new political context. The West will be a friend and a source of food, toys and movies. If this officially happens, revolutionary Iran will no longer be the same Iran after the negotiations.
This is all dependent on the validity of the theory of the box which the regime imprisoned itself in. It’s also dependent on whether the Iranian regime is seeking to find its way into a modern world and a global system that does not tolerate rebels. It is also dependent on whether Iran becomes a country that is open to the world and that exports its products and not its rebels and its revolution. What may thwart the attempt to escape the revolution are the domestic struggles which haven’t yet been finalized even though the revolution’s leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, died around a quarter of a century ago. The state’s celebrations and politicians’ gatherings still feature massive photographs of the revolution’s leaders, just as the Chinese did in the past as they competed to show loyalty to Mao Tse-Tung. However, once Beijing opened itself up to the world, Mao Tse-Tung’s image became like that of China’s other bygone emperors. China espoused a history of pride but did not feel the need to bow to Mao Tse-Tung or to his teachings.
Zarif says that the world wants an understanding on the basis of logic, dialogue and respect but the truth is the world has always tried to reach an understanding with Iran. It is the Iranian leadership, which closed in on itself, accusing anyone who extends its hand to foreign parties of collaboration, treason and Zionism. Perhaps these restraints will be broken and the Iranians will free themselves of their box. If negotiations are a mere tactic to escape the box in order to attack others and expand, then the regime will have chosen to end its life, just as suicide bombers do.
—
Email: [email protected]
