Your trusted source

Below is Iranian Diplomacy’s interview with Mohammad Farhad Koleini, a senior expert on strategic affairs.

- Jeddah is host to an Arab-American-Turkish meeting on Thursday to discuss methods of combating Daesh. Meanwhile, the Russian Foreign Minister has stated that the coalition against Daesh will not succeed without the presence of Syria, Russia and Iran. Why haven’t these three countries been invited to this meeting?

- It cannot be said that a non-invitation would mean no interaction. The foreign ministers of the European countries have stressed their interest in interaction with Iran in their contacts with the officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran. At the same time, the representatives of the US Congress have always reiterated Iran’s status and role as a stable force. Of course, the regional cooperation of the Islamic Republic of Iran and recent dialogues established between Riyadh and Tehran are very significant. Planning for next steps must be pursued by Riyadh.

On one hand, Mr. Obama has mentioned the issue of radical movements and their components. At the same time, there are reports that the Hague Tribunal is studying the situation of the financial supporters based on cases that were adopted by the Security Council. The issue of radicalism and attending to it needs transparency, honesty and seriousness which have not, hitherto, been seen. Recently, Mr. Shamkhani, the Secretary of Iran’s National Security Council, met and negotiated with the Foreign Minister of Denmark. This trend could be studied based on the behavior and outlook of the West.

Mr. Lavrov, the Foreign Minister of Russia, has also made logical statements in this regard. While some of the initiators of the coalition against terrorism were the financial supporters of these groups in the region, they have now become the frontrunners of the fight against these groups. It does not seem that the fight against radicalism would succeed within the framework of a cliché. The main question is, despite a lack of seriousness in the fight against radicalism during the first days of the measures taken by Daesh, what is the objective behind this coalition which is similar to the September 11th incident? Is this coalition aimed at strengthening the interests and prosperity of the people of Iraq or will there again be some type of intervention in the region? What will be the ultimate goal of this approach? The issue that must carefully be studied is why this coalition is pursued outside of the Security Council,

- Based on NATO policies, the absence of Russia could be justified based on the issue of the Ukrainian crisis. But what is the reason behind Iran’s absence in the fight against radicalism considering Iran’s activities to help the groups fighting against Daesh?

- Right now, the final coalition has not been formed yet. NATO is mainly concentrated in Eastern Europe and attempts to psychologically support Ukraine. The US pursues the issue of Iraq outside of NATO, even though NATO supports this coalition. At one time, there were 18 countries which had agreed to the coalition but it is said that their number has now reached 40. This is not an issue which could remain in the circle of NATO. On the other hand, some positions have been taken which must be considered. The Zionist regime has stated that some of the regional countries including Qatar and Turkey, which have played roles in the formation of radicalism, must be held accountable. This is an interesting issue. Perhaps, the Zionist regime seeks to hide its role in the establishment of radicalism which is now out of control. Therefore, since Israel assumes that the issue has gotten out of hand and attempts to erase the main issue, it is now attempting to direct the attention to other countries. Perhaps this is true for some western countries. Some western states which are NATO members have also been involved in the formation of this situation. Even Mrs. Hillary Clinton, as an US official, had stated that the US had played a role in the establishment of Daesh and the radical movements. No one can deny this. Numerous questions are in the minds of the public opinion of the world.

- Russia believes that the absence of Iran, Russia and Syria in the fight against Daesh is based on a double standard and will never succeed. Is this really the case?

- This is the reality. Before, when the crisis in Syria had begun, I had stated that Syria is different from Egypt. Syria is part of a symmetrical security fight and the society is not involved with social issues and moving towards civil liberties. At that time, many of these issues were not transparently divided, such as what is the nature of the Arab Spring and what is the meaning of the events which were happening in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen. Analysts analyzed these incidents as related movements, while each one of them had its own characteristics. With regard to Iran, Syria and Russia, they stressed that what was happening was not directed towards political reconstruction in the region, but that it was rather a movement which came out of radical layers. No one paid attention to this issue and even now, this group is being armed in Syria and 500 million dollars have been given to them as financial support. This is paradoxical behavior. The fact is that in the spiritual fight against radicalism, Iran was one of the countries which were seriously against it. It is the others who must now pay for their mistakes. The West is well aware of Iran’s role in this issue. The Islamic Republic of Iran demands movement towards better conditions and democracy in these societies. Iran stresses a move towards energy security and expansion of compassionate Islam. That is why this is the nature of the dialogues which Iran has pursued in the global scene within the framework of closeness of religions and sects. The Islamic Republic of Iran separates regional events from Sunnism and does not link the radical movements with the Sunnis. Today we even see some changes in the regional movements. For example, Taliban’s changes show that during the past ten years, their outlook towards diplomacy has changed. Today’s Taliban is not a movement which agrees with Daesh’s measures. Daesh’s Jihad al-Nikah is one example. Political jurisprudence of the Sunnis and even the new Taliban contradicts Daesh’s measures. At one time, the Taliban in Afghanistan opposed girls’ education in schools but today that is not the case. Today the main area of the radical movement is Daesh. Daesh is not a regional but a global threat. Iran is always part of the solution and Russia stresses this point based on its understanding of the reality on the scene. Iran, Russia and Syria have always warned against the consequences of wrongful supports for this radical movement.