Jalili’s Flawed Foreign Policy
In the first debate with Masoud Pezeshkian in the second round of elections, Saeed Jalili once again presented the same ideas and aspirations he has pursued all his life, which during his tenure in nuclear negotiations led to the issuance of various resolutions against Iran in the UN Security Council.
He explicitly stated that he is seeking demands in the JCPOA and FATF, asserting that Iran has fulfilled its commitments and now the other side must fulfill theirs. When faced with the question of what he would do if they don’t, he had no clear answer.
Mr. Jalili’s main issue is that he does not understand international relations and their dynamics. He views international relations from a legal and ethical perspective, whereas fundamentally, what determines the interests and position of countries on the international stage is power.
On the day the JCPOA was agreed upon, I emphasized in a note that the JCPOA was the result of all Iran’s power and capabilities, and it wasn’t that the U.S. wanted to give more concessions but the Iranian negotiating team didn’t want them or didn’t strive for more.
Mr. Jalili talks about demands today just as over a decade ago in nuclear negotiations with the 5+1, he spoke of Iran’s necessity to be involved in global management. If Jalili’s stances then led to crippling sanctions and successive resolutions against Iran, today’s demands will yield no different result.
In the Monday night debate, Jalili said that sanctions are America’s tool and we must make America regret imposing sanctions on Iran. In other words, like before, he emphasizes the ‘must’ but doesn’t say how he plans to achieve this. In reality, his positions are appealing in terms of rhetoric and may even provoke some people’s pride and zeal, thinking yes, we should not yield to force and must make the enemy regret it. But in reality, these positions will bring nothing but misery, pressure, and hardship.
Mr. Jalili says we can export 11 billion dollars worth of vegetables to Russia. Whether Iran has the capacity to produce this amount of vegetables beyond domestic needs is another matter. He needs to explain how he plans to receive the payment—in rubles or by bartering with Russian goods.
He either doesn’t know or doesn’t want to know that today about 70% of global transactions are conducted in dollars and over 20% in euros, and if the U.S. does not allow it, no financial transactions and transfers in dollars between two countries will take place.
This is why even Iraq, with all its claims of influence and friendship with that country, cannot pay for the electricity it has bought from Iran without U.S. permission, nor can China settle Iran’s claims.
In these circumstances, Mr. Jalili’s friends should resort to solutions like transferring dollars in suitcases, bartering goods, trading in local currencies, and similar methods. And as Pezeshkian said, perhaps with these methods, one can have a subsistence living, but we can certainly never achieve development.
In fact, it is Mr. Jalili who lacks a correct understanding of international relations and thinks that if he demands our rights, America will present them on a platter. This is why he is led to incorrect prescriptions.
Mr. Jalili says foreign policy is the realm of realities, but he does not understand this main and important reality that in foreign policy, one can maneuver and act based on the general sense of power, not just military.
Therefore, it is quite clear that for Mr. Jalili and his friends, ideology takes precedence over interests, and ideology even takes precedence over reality. Otherwise, no sane person would say that sanctions are a blessing.
The writer previously emphasized in a note that one of the issues that can harm national interests is the miscalculation of high-ranking officials regarding the level of power and the real position of the country in the international arena.
In other words, just as underestimating the country’s power compared to its real level can lead to the loss of many interests and opportunities, overestimating it is also harmful and mistaken.
That note was written in response to comments by Mehdi Safari, the Deputy for Economic Diplomacy at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Raisi’s government, who is now a foreign policy advisor to Mr. Jalili.
He had said that Iran is only a small distance from becoming a superpower. Naturally, such views cause Mr. Jalili to pursue global management instead of solving main issues and focusing on the country’s development.