‘West should accept a cooperative, nuclear Iran’

Part 4 of KT Interview with Mustafa Shamamy, Republican Movement of Kurdistan (RMK):

KT: What is your attitude towards the threat of US and/or Israeli military action against the Iran regime?

MS: America is conducting a policy of militarising the Middle East – aimed at abolishing the dictatorial systems and, alongside this, it also conducts a policy of controlling the changes that evolve from the ‘Arab Spring’ with the intention of assisting the democratisation process in these countries. It has also become apparent that the international and regional policy against Iran is not to bring down the regime but rather to bring about internal changes and persuade Iran through International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to abandon its nuclear programme. One deems the military threats as the second stage – aimed at intimidation – of their critical dialogue; and that military intervention is the third stage.

In our view, although these military threats directed at Iran appear to be serious, in practice it is unlikely that they will lead to war. In reality, analysing not only its media doctrine, but also the America’s hidden national interest and security doctrine, we come to the conclusion that Iran does not pose a threat. In fact, labelling it as a political and military threat, on an international as well as a regional level, is deemed as serving America’s national interest. As result of labelling it as a threat to the Gulf countries, America and other Western countries are selling billions of dollars’ worth of weapons annually to these states. Whenever military conflict is seen as a way of settling the balance of power in the world, the weapons market reaches a peak. Nowadays, in a time of technology and modern strategy, ‘preventive methods’ are used as a means to avoid conflicts, uphold the international rule of law and organise the power balance.

It’s possible that, in order to protect the profits and interests of the weapons market, political and military threats can be invented. Furthermore, labelling Iran as a serious threat to the regional powers and a serious threat to world peace and security can be seen as political bluffing and an indication that America and the West are on the verge of losing their long term interests in the region.

Ultimately, all three stages of dialogue between Iran and the West can end with the acceptance by the West of a nuclear Iran. However, accepting a nuclear Iran can only be achieved when Iran is willing to cooperate with the West, ensure the protection of world peace and security, fight international terrorism and drug trafficking, help strengthen business ties on an international level and, most importantly, ensure that a nuclear Iran will not be a threat to Israel as a country, a Jewish nation in the region. We can say that, from the end of the Second World War until now, it was a nuclear capability by powerful countries that guaranteed world peace and security. Since nuclear capability has been an important factor in ensuring peace, and in order to avoid another regional conflict, why can’t the surrounded Islamic Republic achieve nuclear capability to help guarantee world peace and security in the long term?

KT: Do you envisage the regime being overthrown by a movement like the Arab Spring in Egypt and Tunisia?

MS: Despite the fact that the Arab Spring dismantled the dictatorial systems that were installed by the new and old Western colonies, its result was opposite of the US and other Western countries’ agenda. The process was used as an appropriate mechanism of democratisation that benefited the Muslim people. As we have witnessed, it was the revolutions of the Arab Spring that resulted in this new model of democracy – ‘Islamocracy’: the power of Muslim people, by the Muslim people and for the Muslim people is being successfully put to test.

If we accept this, we can come to the conclusion that that Iranian revolution in 1979 had similarities to the Arab Spring. 33 years ago the nations of Iran managed to remove the dictatorial system which had been installed and supported by the West and, through the Iranian Spring and with the help of democracy as an appropriate mechanism, the Islamic Republic was invented as a new political system. Therefore, regardless of the current internal and external threats on Iran, it is impossible for the Iranian regime to be removed as result of the Arab Spring’s waves.

However, in order to protect itself, Iran must provide a long term guarantee to its political system by making changes and opening up its politics, civil society and democracy. In this direction, it is also necessary to start acknowledging the rights of the Iranian nations, one of which is the Kurds, and to solve their problems.

 KT: How do you view developments in south Kurdistan?

MS: Because I have been living in exile since 1983, I haven’t had the chance to return to Kurdistan, and therefore I might not be able to offer accurate assessment of the developments in south Kurdistan. Based on my observation of its political culture, infrastructure, jobs and financial developments through the lens of local media, I can see a clear but dramatic picture where the society is full of sadness and happiness at the same time. The reason I say a society full of sadness and happiness is because a small section of the society has benefited greatly from the national revenue and services while the rest, the majority, have been deprived of services and live below the poverty line.

Thinking about this critically, we know this situation is the result of a particular type of development, which is far removed from national politics and equality because it only services the interests of political parties and a small fraction of the society. Compared to previous years, south Kurdistan has seen a substantial amount of development, but this hasn’t helped those living below the poverty line. It’s the job of the government to let equality prevail and help those living in poverty by improving the quality of their lives, especially in those areas that have least benefited from the economic developments.

KT: How can Kurds in the diaspora and south Kurdistan assist your struggle?

MS: The Kurdish community in the diaspora is passive and has no determination to follow up matters of national interest. Their dedication to their political parties is far greater than their national interest and Kurdishness. Unfortunately, the disorganisation and crises of the political parties have been transferred to these communities, leading to identity crises. Each group has established strong ideological, spiritual and organisational ties with one party and thus there is no unity. Even though a number of people dissatisfied with this situation may contact the movement, it might make sense for us not to expect their help and waste time with them. That is why the Republican Movement of Kurdistan has concentrated all its work and activities inside the country, making Eastern Kurdistan the source of all its energy.

Concluded

• Part 1 of this interview
• Part 2
• Part 3

Copyright © 2012 Kurdistantribune.com