“Continuity and Change in Iranian International Relations”

Prepared Remarks by Dr. M. Javad Zarif

Deputy Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran

At the Instituto Affari Internazionali

Rome, June 16, 1998

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

Dear Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen;

I am delighted to have the opportunity to be here today, and to engage in a hopefully frank and serious exchange of views on “Continuity and Change in Iran’s international relations”. I hope at the conclusion of this meeting, we could all agree that, if not extremely stimulating intellectually, it was not a waste of time all together, and that at least we found some food for thought.

I intend to focus more on the new possibilities in Iran’s foreign policy during the administration of President Khatami than on the aspect of continuity in order to cover more ground. I do so for I presume that all of you who are generally familiar with Iranian affairs have already accepted the point of departure that the Islamic principles and the fundamentals of our revolution will continue to underlie both the formulation and the implementation of our foreign policy agenda.

In fact, the mandate of President Khatami and his administration is to institutionalize a harmonious relationship between adherence to the principles and values of the Islamic revolution on the one hand and comprehensive development and international cooperation on the other. The broad spectrum of support for the President Khatami, which cut across age, gender, profession, income, education and urbanization is clear testimony to this unique mandate and popular expectation.

The possibilities of change in Iran’s foreign policy should be examined within a political and psychological context. As a people who have successfully experienced an ideologically driven revolution, we had to prove to ourselves and to the rest of the world that an Islamic government is not incompatible with pluralism and democratic rule. We started from the assertion that Islamic political thought could resolve the erroneous historical dichotomy between submission to the will of God and respect for the will of the people. Between adherence to Divine principles and empowerment of and accountability to the people. And, as President Khatami puts it “between salvation and liberty”.

Last year’s presidential election in Iran was the climax of this process, which encompasses a continuum of over eighteen years. It has now been established, according to friends and foes, that, at least as far as the Iranian experience is concerned, not only the two are not incompatible, but also they can even be mutually reinforcing.

Having established this as a reality, the Iranian nation mandated its popularly elected government to focus primarily on institutionalization of this achievement and the development of the country in all its aspects; moral, social, political, and economic.

You agree with me that such social trends are irreversible and independent of personalities. Yet, its positive international implications depend largely on understanding and constructive response. Thus, the logical option is to recognize and grasp this historic moment. Many developments in our region as well as yours show a more serious appreciation of this unique opportunity. On the other hand, the dominant behavior of the United States indicates the persistence of unrealistic mentalities geared to serve domestic constituencies.

Let me now highlight some priorities in our foreign policy.

1. On the Global Level:

1.1. Dialogue between Civilizations

As we approach a new millenium, the international community is undergoing a historical period marked by uncertainty as well as opportunity, both created by the collapse of the bi-polar world order. Cold war habits and the prevailing mentality tend to fade very slowly and resist the realities of change. This is specially so, when vested interests associated with policies of exclusion and rivalry try to bread fear and enmity.

The doomsday predictions of clash of civilizations represent the climax of the attempts by such vested cold war interests to rationalize and even sanctify policies of exclusion, rendering them irreversible. And the real danger is that they can become self-fulfilling prophecies.

But the dangers that the uncertainties of transition entail are not the only characteristics of the times. Our transitional international order provides a singular opportunity to present and foster fundamentally different modes of global interaction. That is to try to approach a new concert where the common search for values would focus on:

· tolerance instead of dominance;

· universality rather than Unisom;

· wisdom in place of chiefdom;

· confidence and not conspiracy;

· serenity as opposed to enmity;

· sanctity instead of sacrilege;

· liberty rather than laissez faire.

Such an ideal global order can be aproximated only through communication, understanding, and tolerance among various peoples and nations holding different views and moving from differing historical backgrounds and experiences. In this context, President Khatami’s initiative for dialogue between civilizations represents a new global approach and our foremost foreign policy priority.

1.2. Promotion of the Rule of Law;

Dialogue and healthy international climate require a commitment by all states to respect international obligations they have undertaken and a sound implementation of those commitments. The rule of law prevents despotism and anarchy at the domestic level and hegemony and war at the international level. Rule of law constitutes the only proper setting for the participation of all individuals and nations in shaping their own destiny and building a better and more prosperous tomorrow for their national societies and the global community.

Therefore, the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of others, non-use of force in international affairs, and respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity of other states must be scrupulously observed by all states, big and small. Iran is fully committed to these principles. On the other hand, unilateral measures, including extra-territorial application of domestic jurisdiction, are not only the very antithesis of the rule of law, but in fact disruptive of normal inter-state conduct. Such shortsighted triumph of domestic politicking over common sense cannot have a fate other than what we have seen in recent past.

2. On the Regional Level: Enhancing Confidence, Security and Cooperation

In this complex and interdependent world, all states have a shared responsibility not only in avoiding provocative acts, but also in joint efforts to find peaceful solutions to our common problems. In addition to the necessary and fundamental requirement of the rule of law, empowerment, public participation, dialogue, and tolerance are essential requisite to decrease tension and find amicable solutions to international problems in a context where the interest and views of all are taken into account.

We are determined to pursue this approach energetically in our domestic and global relations, particularly within our immediate region. The nature and the extent of relations with neighbors have always been of fundamental importance to Iran, and have found an even greater prominence under the new administration. The new emphasis on comprehensive and sustainable development requires calm and tranquil neighborhood, which has been mostly lacking in the past two decades.

In order to de-escalate tension and promote prosperity and cooperation in our region, we plan to take stock of our multi-faceted commonalities and engage our neighbors in a continued process of communication and dialogue to ascertain the sources of threat perception and work together to address them. Expansion of economic and trade relations within the countries of the region will also help to build confidence that, in turn, reinforces the political dialogue and the joint effort for promotion of peace and security in the region.

The Eighth Summit of the Organization of Islamic Conference provided a unique opportunity to work collectively to build confidence among all Muslim countries. One of the most important decisions of the Summit was to establish a committee to look into various mechanisms for dialogue and confidence building. This will enable Islamic countries to take a more assertive and constructive role in international affairs.

In the regional context, I can refer to three specific areas of concern, which require active involvement:

2.1. Persian Gulf

The Persian Gulf has been the scene of two bitter wars, massive foreign military presence and unparalleled waste of scarce resources on sophisticated weapon systems. Continued anxiety over Iraqi plans and ambitions coupled with the plight of Iraqi people exacerbate uncertainty in this region.

Here, we underline the need for mutual recognition of the legitimate concern and interest of the international community for stability and security of this region on the one hand and the proportionate constructive role of all regional states in this endeavor on the other. We advocate the gradual establishment of a security and cooperation scheme encompassing all eight littoral states of the Persian Gulf. Of course, Iraq needs to meet certain requirements before it can enter. But the important consideration is that this arrangement should not be envisaged from the beginning as one excluding Iraq or one formed to counter Iraq or any other states within and outside the region.

2.2. Central Asia

Central Asia has been marred by the implications of the break-up of the old empire and indeed of the cold war and the turmoil associated with state building. The Caspian Sea, with its vast mineral resources, particularly oil and gas, has turned into an arena for competing claims of sovereignty -- generally foreign-stimulated, precluding the necessary confidence and predictability essential for long-term and mutually beneficial foreign investment.

The economic prosperity of Central Asia and the Caucasus and the diversification of their economies constitute the foundation for peace and stability in this region. This can only be achieved through cooperation and inclusion and not through block-formation and exclusion. For this, Iran with its partners, Turkey and Pakistan, have embraced these nations into the Economic Cooperation Organization. In my view, it is always important to remember that this region -- with its newly found prominence -- is a permanent reminder of the collapse of cold war and hegemony. We should not make this very region a scene for old cold war policies of confrontation and exclusion; now under new guises and with new targets.

The Caspian Sea and its oil and gas reserves constitute one important source of revenue for development of the new states. Yet, long term predictability and development require a legal regime, which can meet the acceptance of all littoral states, while at the same time is most responsive to the pressing environmental concerns regarding this unique body of water, which incidentally is not a sea, but world’s largest lake. And again, this may not be so incidental, as it has important ramifications for the legal regime.

2.3. South Asia and the Middle East

The recent developments in India and Pakistan have underlined the inherent instability of a non-proliferation regime, which not only fails to address the ultimate objective of nuclear disarmament, but also seriously lacks universality. The tests by India and Pakistan have, in our view, rendered the entire region less secure. Thus, we find serious reason to be alarmed about this issue, and use every means available to contain the situation.

The visit of Iranian Foreign Minister to Indian and Pakistan provided a unique opportunity to hear the views of both sides at the highest levels. This has lead to the articulation of a scenario by Iran to contain this issue through a comprehensive bilateral, regional and global approach. In our view at the global level, a representative group of nuclear and non-nuclear members of NPT must begin consultation to bring the two countries in the NPT fold. Bilaterally, Pakistan and India should begin high level contacts in order to deal with peace and security, Kashmir, confidence-building measures, and nuclear weapons.

Regionally, every effort should be directed at the revitalization of a Nuclear Weapon Free Zone in South Asia.

Furthermore, in order to address the threat of spill over effects into the Middle East, it is necessary also to pursue vigorously the proposal to establish a zone free from weapons of mass destruction in this region. In this context, there is a need to address seriously the campaign by the United States and Israel to prevent the realization of this objective through blocking all efforts to bring Israeli nuclear facilities under international control and inspection, while at the same time waging a misinformation about Iranian nuclear potential. Unlike Israel, Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has consistently complied and will continue to comply with its obligations under that Treaty. This is clearly and repeatedly acknowledged by the IAEA itself.

Iran is one of the few states in the modern period to be a target of chemical warfare. Yet it did not retaliate in kind, despite gross provocation, and it has never manufactured, deployed or used either biological or chemical weapons. This has been confirmed by several United Nations fact-finding missions.

It is thus necessary to mobilize international pressure against Israel to accede to NPT and place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards.

As to the larger picture of Middle East peace, Iran’s analysis and position is that a solution to the Middle East problem requires a comprehensive and democratic approach based on respect for the rights of all concerned. The current peace effort neglects the rights of the Palestinian people, including their inalienable right to self-determination. Its problems are inherent in the formula that it advocates, and Iran has taken no action whatsoever to disrupt it.

But let me underline before leaving this subject that nuclear non-proliferation and establishment of nuclear weapon free zones in the Middle East as well as South Asia should not be made conditional upon any other political or diplomatic development. Accepting such justifications from Israel or other could only lead to nuclearization of these two volatile areas.

3. On Bilateral Level:

The Islamic Republic of Iran wants to establish or further expand its relations with other states based on mutual respect and non-interference. There is a great deal of potential for expansion and strengthening of relations between Iran and the European countries. There are vast areas of common concern such as organized crime, drug trafficking and regional crisis both in our part of the world as well as yours. There are also immense possibilities for cooperation and enhancement of mutual gains in the field of energy, environment and commerce.

There have been incidents that indicate the absence of some of the fundamental ingredients required for relations of mutual respect, including lack of proper appreciation of Iranian realities in Europe. Following the Iranian presidential elections, we have detected some signs that a more reasonable approach from European Union and its member-states may be forthcoming. We have noted that Italy has taken a leading role in promoting such a more constructive approach. This contributes not only to the further strengthening of our bilateral relations, but also to a conducive atmosphere for Iran and Italy to launch the dialogue between civilizations. Iran and Italy, as inheritors of two of the most ancient civilizations, which have left their clear mark on humanity, can play a leading role in promoting this dialogue. This will lead to further enrichment of our common human heritage and lead to a more secure and stable world for future generations.