Rouhani at the United Nations; Limitations of Interaction

Hassan Rouhani, the President of Iran, was the tenth speaker on the second day of the United Nations General Assembly. Since his arrival in New York, the Iranian government team and diplomats have been active in clarifying Iran's viewpoints on international affairs, especially regarding the nuclear agreement (JCPOA), to American media and UN officials. Rouhani was accompanied by Mohammad Javad Zarif (Foreign Minister), Abbas Araghchi (Deputy Foreign Minister), Mohammad Nahavandian (Economic Deputy to the President), and Mahmoud Vaezi (Head of the Presidential Office and Chief of Staff). However, Rouhani had a tight schedule from the moment he arrived in New York. The main focus of discussions in Rouhani's meetings was primarily related to the nuclear agreement. In his meeting with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, interviews with Christiane Amanpour on CNN, and CBS, as well as meetings with the British Foreign Secretary and others, the JCPOA was the centerpiece of discussions. Although it is likely that consular issues were also raised in the meeting between the Iranian and British foreign ministers, which could naturally relate to the situation of Nazanin Zaghari, the British-Iranian dual national imprisoned in Iran. The issue of American and foreign prisoners in Iran was also directly referenced in Donald Trump's speech yesterday. With the recent positions of the US government regarding a potential exit from the JCPOA and the unexpected and harsh speech that Donald Trump delivered in the UN General Assembly, the work of the President and his diplomatic team became more challenging. On one hand, Rouhani had to clarify his government's official positions on various issues, including civil rights and minorities, during the short time he had to deliver his speech, and on the other hand, he needed to effectively respond to Trump's remarks. In his UN speech, Rouhani presented a beautiful 'manifesto' of interaction with the world. Many of the points he raised in this manifesto do not align with the practical realities in the country. In other words, the theoretical aspects of this manifesto are stronger than its practical aspects, as it must overcome the barriers posed by fundamentalists and extremists linked to the central power circle and their military supporters to be implemented. There are two weaknesses in this manifesto that must be overcome for the success of Rouhani's interactive programs. One of these internal barriers relates to opening up the social space, ensuring the participation of all people regardless of gender, religion, ethnicity, and political beliefs. Alongside this issue, the widespread violation of freedoms and the lack of adherence to human rights standards in Iran are also fundamental obstacles domestically. The second barrier is the problem that has existed since the establishment of the Iranian political system in relation to the United States, which must be fundamentally addressed. Rouhani appeared to be reading from a text, and it seemed that parts of his speech were written in response to Trump's remarks from the previous day. Rouhani's 24-minute speech included several sections, the most important of which are examined below: The position of the government and declaration of political positions – Rouhani initially referred to the statistical results of the elections last spring to show the position and political philosophy of his government, stating that the people voted for his program of 'moderation and respect for human rights and civil rights in domestic policy and adopting a constructive interaction policy in foreign affairs and progress in the path of economic transformation.' He also spoke of the 'political-social maturity of society' in a 'democratic' government that, in his view, has only been established in Iran for four decades. He considered the people to be 'the greatest support of the Islamic Republic.' This is while Donald Trump had positioned the Iranian people against the regime, stating that the greatest fear of the Islamic Republic is the people. Rouhani also confirmed that for the past 150 years, 'human rights and civil rights alongside Islamism and justice-seeking' have been among the most important demands of the people. He pointed out that the government had announced a 'Charter of Citizen Rights' in the previous term. While the charter he referred to has never gone beyond a theoretical state, Rouhani considered it a 'realization' of the people's demands over the past 110 years. It seems there is a significant gap between what Rouhani describes as a 'democratic' government and the scientific definition of democracy on one side and the existing social and political realities in Iran on the other. Concerned eyes from democracy advocates, human rights watchers, UN reporters, Reporters Without Borders, etc., do not recognize Iran as a 'democratic' system. In a situation where all representatives of democracy, from opposition activists, women, journalists, labor activists, religious minorities, etc., have filled the prisons, can the President's description of a democratic system be believed? The philosophy of moderation – Rouhani attempted to explain the philosophy of moderation as the creed of his government, placing it in contrast to 'the dance of swords' and 'exported weapons,' which was a veiled reference to Trump's trip to Saudi Arabia and his participation in the traditional sword dance ceremony, as well as the arms contracts between the US and Saudi Arabia. He further placed 'poverty and war and conflict' among Muslims in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, Afghanistan, and Myanmar in opposition to the existence of development, security, and welfare in some countries, referring to the deprivation of the Palestinian people from 'the least human rights' as stemming from the security for 'the occupiers' of that land without mentioning Israel. In a situation where, following the recent presidential elections in Iran, there have been numerous complaints from the Sunni minority regarding the lack of social rights and political participation, or the Baha'i minority due to deprivation and repression; Mr. Rouhani introduced Iran as 'the flag bearer of tolerance towards different religions and ethnicities' and stated: 'We are the same nation that saved the Jews from the suffering of Babylonian captivity and welcomed Christian Armenians with open arms.' Although these two issues are historically distanced from each other, one belonging to the ancient world and the other to the Islamic era. It is an undeniable fact in history that part of the Christians were forcibly relocated to Jolfa at least in the 11th century AH. However, it can be understood that Rouhani's perspective is from a national interest standpoint and his goal is to counter the existing warmongering voices and create the belief that Iran does not intend to go to war. Religious Empire - Rouhani defended Iran's positions in the fight against terrorism and drew on the literary history of Iran from 'poetry, literature, and wisdom' in Iranian culture, denying the 'development of a religious empire.' Reminding of Rumi, Saadi, and Hafez certainly brings to mind the elevated cultural status of Iran for intellectual and history-oriented societies, and undoubtedly, if these statements are not denied by religious hardliners, they could be effective in creating a more moderate image of Iran internationally. But unfortunately, there is no reassuring coordination between the President's statements and Iran's actions in the region, and soon the flood of criticisms from hardliners will diminish the application and value of these statements. Nuclear Agreement - After this civilizational and cultural introduction, Mr. Rouhani addressed UN Security Council Resolution 2331 and the nuclear agreement (JCPOA). In fact, he wanted to say that Resolution 2331 should be considered as a whole, which the body that supports and approves it, namely the 'Security Council,' legitimizes it, and therefore any action to violate it is considered opposition to the Security Council's actions, and since the JCPOA is part of this resolution, it is not negotiable. He defined the JCPOA as 'a document of the Security Council' and an interaction based on constructive participation between Iran and the world, considering President Trump's statements about revising the JCPOA as a form of 'self-sanctioning' that has now turned into a 'feeling of loss.' Global observers have a different interpretation regarding this, and there is a perception that despite Iran's ability to reach an agreement with European countries following the signing of the nuclear agreement, it has not succeeded due to mutual distrust in establishing friendly relations with the US. The only way to remove this barrier is to start negotiations, which can be initiated at any time. Undoubtedly, negotiations with the US could create a new understanding regarding Iran, regional goals, and Iran's defense policies, and under its shadow, there may even be no need to negotiate about the JCPOA. Although Rouhani believes that 'crossing dangerous threats and complex transformations of the current transitional period' can only be achieved through 'increasing contacts and exchanges, and institutionalizing dialogues by governments and nations,' it is unclear why he does not implement this directive in practice to resolve Iran's disputes with the United States. Rouhani strongly criticized Donald Trump for the 'venomous and ugly' rhetoric he used in his speech the previous day against the Islamic Republic of Iran, considering it contrary to the dignity of this organization. Other state leaders, such as France, have also criticized the US positions regarding the nuclear agreement. In another part of his speech, the Iranian President defended Iran's missile programs, considering the current missile productions entirely justified and defensive in light of the eight-year war and missile attacks by Iraq on Iran during Saddam Hussein's time. This is not a point that the US and Europe would agree with, and it is one of the significant points of contention that seems resolvable in the negotiation atmosphere (if negotiations take place). In another part of his speech, the Iranian President stated that 'the crises in Syria, Yemen, and Bahrain have no military solution' and proposed acceptance of the people's votes and cessation of violence as a resolution. Economic Outlook - In the final minutes, the President of Iran spoke about the capacities of the country's economy for 'growth and development.' He deemed sanctions ineffective and invited the international community to invest in this economy, which he believes has the growth potential of 'one trillion dollars in the next twenty years.' He rightly pointed to Iran's valuable oil and gas reserves and announced the country's readiness for participation in investment and 'long-term cooperation for global energy security.' In his UN speech, Rouhani presented a beautiful 'manifesto' of interaction with the world. Many of the points he raised in this manifesto do not align with the practical realities in the country. In other words, the theoretical aspects of this manifesto are stronger than its practical aspects, as it must overcome the barriers posed by fundamentalists and extremists linked to the central power circle and their military supporters to be implemented. There are two weaknesses in this manifesto that must be overcome for the success of Rouhani's interactive programs. One of these internal barriers relates to opening up the social space, ensuring the participation of all people regardless of gender, religion, ethnicity, and political beliefs. Alongside this issue, the widespread violation of freedoms and the lack of adherence to human rights standards in Iran are also fundamental obstacles domestically. The second barrier is the problem that has existed since the establishment of the Iranian political system in relation to the United States, which must be fundamentally addressed. The 72nd UN General Assembly provided an opportunity to revisit these issues. We hope that the political philosophy of the Iranian President can create such capacities for the success of government programs; otherwise, another four years will pass without any fundamental transformation.