Note: Regional JCPOA, Yes? No? The Costs of Compromise and Resistance

The Middle East has long been caught in the expansion of the influence of international and regional governments to the point of dragging countries into internal and external wars. Once, the most significant divide in the region was between occupation and anti-occupation. Now, several other divides have emerged and are on their way to becoming the main divides in the region. A- Nationalist Divides: Turkish nationalism (Neo-Ottomanism), Arab nationalism, Iranian nationalism, Kurdish nationalism, and Jewish nationalism. B- Religious Divides: Excluding Jews, Christians, and Bahá'ís, we only look at the divides among different narratives of Islam: Brotherhood Islam (Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, Qatar, Turkey, Syria, Tunisia, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc.), Wahhabi Islam (Saudi Arabia, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Taliban, etc.), Shia Islam (Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, etc.). The Islamic Revolution led by Ayatollah Khomeini sought to turn the anti-Israeli and anti-American divide into the main divide of the region and form the Resistance Axis around it. However, due to the intersection of multiple divides, the interests of governments and alliances among them, other divides in the region became active and turned into main divides. The weakness of freedom-seeking forces in the region on one hand, and the unpreparedness of social foundations on the other, prevented the issue of dictatorship versus democracy from becoming the main divide in the Middle East. Democracy-seekers have been pushed back across the region. Erdogan's Turkey has also experienced a regression with his consolidation of power. Without collective security and peace, economic and political development will turn into unattainable luxurious dreams. All freedom-seekers and human rights defenders must now strive to first transform the divide between war and peace into the main divide of the region. If peace is established with a "collective agreement" approved and guaranteed by the UN Security Council, and the security of all is ensured, and the region is completely free of nuclear and mass destruction weapons, then one can hope for the opening of the path to freedom, democracy, and human rights. The Conflict of Two Foreign Policies of Iran Ayatollah Khamenei and Hassan Rouhani have two different programs for foreign policy. Hassan Rouhani is interactionist, dialogical, and seeks peaceful coexistence with regional countries, Western governments, and the US. However, conflict and confrontation are the logical consequences of Ayatollah Khamenei's views. Each of these two perspectives has many implications for Iran and Iranians. The majority vote of the Iranian people in 2013 and 2017 for Hassan Rouhani was, in a significant sense, a vote for peace, a rejection of conflict, and an avoidance of war. For Iranians, preserving Iran from this dangerous quagmire (becoming like Iraq, Libya, or Syria) is prioritized over everything else. Iran's regional and international policy must change to preserve Iran and develop its economy. The future of Iran and Iranians is too important to be decided by a single individual. Ayatollah Khamenei has used and continues to use derogatory language against regional governments, especially Saudi Arabia. With this language, he consciously blocks Hassan Rouhani's path of interaction. Hassan Rouhani also responded to Khamenei on June 15, 2017, saying: "Why don’t some of us correct our tone, and why don’t we know what tone we want to use to speak with the government, the region, and the world? A harsh tone will not get us anywhere. By God, there is no way other than moderation... When Amir al-Mu'minin saw that some of his soldiers in Siffin were cursing the enemy during the battle, he reacted and said, 'I do not want companions who curse their enemies.' Now some of us, who consider ourselves Shiites of Ali, why do we consider cursing an honor and view insults as revolutionary? ... Even in war, do not curse the enemy." On June 9, 2017, Hassan Rouhani also clearly and transparently defended peace with enemies, stating: "Patience and forbearance for peace is harder than patience and perseverance in the battlefield... It takes a lot of courage for a person to extend a hand of peace to enemies for the interests of the Islamic community. Imam Hassan did this for the religion of God and the Islamic community and endured a sword and spear that was much more painful than a sword and spear in the battlefield... Sacrificing oneself and bravery in battle is difficult, but enduring peace is much harder than fighting, and this is while Imam never said he drank the cup of poison during the revolution and war, but he stated this during peace." Ayatollah Khamenei has been severely criticizing the regional and international peace-seeking approach of reformists and moderates for several months. In this article, I will explain and critique his views based on his speeches from June 2017. Khamenei's Absolute Distrust of America Ayatollah Khamenei, on June 3, 2017, during the anniversary of Ayatollah Khomeini at his shrine, criticized Hassan Rouhani's views on engagement with Western countries and the US. He stated that the US government is truly untrustworthy in all matters. This distrust is so widespread that even young Saudis hate their country's dependence on the US. Khamenei said that the height of shamelessness and disregard is when Donald Trump dances the sword with the "backward, primitive tribal chief" - the king of Saudi Arabia, who is a killer of the people of Yemen and Bahrain - and dismisses Iran's 42 million votes in the name of human rights. On June 9, 2017, in a meeting with a group of poets, referring to this issue, he asked them to mock America and Saudi Arabia: "Mock them; well, he dances the sword! This modern ignorance has been combined with tribal ignorance! What could be a more beautiful scene than this? This should be mocked in poetry. A thousand poems can be said about this... Mockery is missing; they should be mocked for the things they sometimes do. For example, to make a country like Saudi Arabia [something] in the UN Human Rights Commission! Nothing could be more interesting than this! It truly deserves mockery; it would be a shame if this is not mocked; it is lost." Why Does Khamenei Believe America Should Be Distrusted? Ayatollah Khamenei, in a speech on June 12, 2017, to the system's leaders, again criticized Hassan Rouhani and tried to explain the reasons for distrust of America. He said: "The issue of not trusting the enemy and the promises of the enemy is serious; this is a serious matter; we have trusted the enemy in some places and have been hurt; even though we could have not trusted, we did not think we would trust, but we did... When it comes to working with foreigners, we must focus carefully on the details and be meticulous and cautious. We should not trust them; neither in practice nor in the quality of expression... Sometimes at certain points, we have given in on an issue [the JCPOA] to take the excuse from the Americans or the enemy, and we have lost something! We should not trust them; [similarly] in various matters." Khamenei told Hassan Rouhani and his like-minded individuals that for these reasons: "We cannot come to terms with America; ambiguous and double-edged words that can be exploited by others should not be said; we must state our matters clearly and explicitly. The Americans should also know that the Islamic Republic will not back down from its main positions. We will not give up on fighting oppression, we will not give up on defending Palestine, we will not give up on fighting for our rights." "National Interests" Must Be Subordinate to "National Identity" Ayatollah Khamenei, in a speech on June 12, 2017, to the system's leaders, said that he intends to speak about issues where there are differences of opinion and which have been neglected. Many officials and past and present governments of Iran have chosen paths that have been misguided and have had slips in their decision-making criteria. He said that while it is true that the criterion for decision-making should be "national interests," national interests should not be defined in a way that conflicts with "the revolutionary identity of the Iranian people." National interests must be subordinate to national identity. The Islamic Revolution defined a new identity for the Iranian nation. The national identity of Iran has three pillars: Islam (Islamic), rooted in history, and revolutionary. Thus, "anything that conflicts with this identity is not national interest, even if we imagine that it is beneficial for the nation or a benefit for the nation; no, anything that contradicts our Islam, our revolution, and our long historical background is not considered national interest... This statement means that our national interests should not be subordinated to the imposition of foreign policies." Khamenei pointed out that the US government defines its interests as international norms and accuses any country that, based on its national interests, conflicts with American norms of being abnormal. For this reason, American politicians accuse Iran of "destabilizing the region." However, firstly: What does the Middle East have to do with America? Secondly: America and its agents have destabilized Africa and the Middle East (Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc.). Thirdly: They created ISIS, and now they only oppose uncontrolled ISIS. Fourthly: America is the root of terrorism, and Trump accuses Iran of supporting terrorism. Khamenei also referred to Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia, saying that Trump and his cabinet members: "Go there and sit with the heads of the medieval tribal regime of Saudi Arabia - this is truly a disgrace that I believe this stain of shame will never be removed from the Americans; it will always be like a brand on their foreheads - and talk about human rights, even against a country like the Islamic Republic! In a country that has not heard a whiff of democracy and elections, they go and sit and mock and speak against a country like Iran that is the center of democracy and the epitome of democracy." In the recent presidential elections, the people said "no" to Khamenei's acceptable foreign policy and defended Hassan Rouhani's interactionist and peace-seeking policy. Without changing the international and regional foreign policy and complete consensus among all factions of the government on this issue, the regime will not be able to solve and address economic issues and problems. Thus, a regional JCPOA not only makes peaceful coexistence among Muslims possible but also paves the way for Iran's economic development. Therefore, according to Khamenei, America is against the national identity of Iran and the Islamic Republic. It is untrustworthy and deceitful. It seeks dominance over the world and the region. It considers its policies as values and global norms and accuses opponents of these policies of terrorism and destabilization. Saudi Arabia is also a backward tribal regime, and associating with it brings shame. However, Khamenei does not stop here and pushes forward. Defeating America and Saudi Arabia In Ayatollah Khamenei's view, the solution lies not in negotiation and compromise but in standing firm and defeating the enemy. On June 9, 2017, he told a group of poets that the Americans had plans and schemes for the region and Iraq, but we neutralized their plans and dashed their hopes. He said: "The issues of Iraq are very important; of course, one might somewhat justify it to the people, [because] most of our people are unaware of the truth of the Iraq issue and what happened in Iraq - the work that the Americans wanted to do in Iraq and how their plans were thwarted and what factors led to this situation - is truly a strange issue; the country of Saddam Hussein turned into the country of martyr Hakim! Just look at how far apart these two are! It is unimaginable how this distance has occurred; this has happened." The two approaches of "confrontation with America and its allies" and "interaction and agreement and friendship with them" lead to different results. Interactionists and peace-seekers constantly highlight the costs and benefits of both approaches. They constantly remind that the policy of confrontation and conflict has a very heavy cost for Iran and Iranians and leads the opposing parties to practical unity against Iran and at least to the siege of Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei has prepared a response for this as well. The Costs of Compromise and the Costs of Resistance One of Ayatollah Khamenei's frustrations in recent years is why reformists, moderates, and Hassan Rouhani consider revolutionary, faithful, Hezbollah youth as "hardliners" and "extremists" and introduce revolutionary zeal as being opposed to rationality? He stated that revolutionary zeal does not conflict with rationality. Khamenei's notion of rationality here is practical rationality - rationality that states that methods and means must correspond with goals and considers the costs and benefits of actions. He then criticized Hassan Rouhani's and the reformists' views on engagement with the West and America, saying: "Some consider rationality to be in this and say that 'challenging powers has costs' - [of course] they are mistaken - yes, challenge has costs, but compromise also has costs. You see that the Saudi government, in order to be able to compromise with the new American president, has to spend more than half of its financial reserves to serve the goals and desires of America. Isn't this a cost? Compromise also has costs. If the challenge is rational, if the challenge is logical, if it is self-confident, its cost is much less than the cost of compromise. I have said that it is not the case that the conspiratorial and aggressive powers will be satisfied to a certain extent; we have seen this in the interactions of recent years. They define a certain limit, and when you retreat within that limit, they raise a new demand and a new claim, and you are again under the same pressure.