The word and deed of foreign affairs — in the beginning was the Word

Analysis of reasons and circumstances that triggered the geopolitical conflict around Iran inevitably suggested the role of diplomacy in foreign policy. Without doubt, any international relations student is aware that diplomacy is an extension of politics. Alas, modern foreign policy bodies of several countries have apparently forgotten this common truth.

Russo-Polish relationship may serve a copybook example of such oblivion. Contemporary history of the two neighboring countries holds the record of drastic deterioration of Moscow-Warsaw relations. Reasons for that are plenty. From one hand, newly-born Russia, having succeeded to the Soviet heritage, concentrated the most of its Western-front political efforts at the more significant states (the USA, Germany, France, Great Britain), forgetting the fact that Poland was no longer the “little brother” of a socialist family, but rather the sixth largest European country with the national interests of its own. From the other hand, Poland — suffering from a victim syndrome caused by Russian imperialism — was trying to prove its Eastern neighbor that it didn’t need Kremlin auspice anymore. These “joint efforts” have eventually driven Russo-Polish relationship to a dead-end with seemingly no way out at all. Polish “dog” selflessly barked at the Russian “caravan”, blocking its path by vetoing the partnership treaty conclusion between the EU and Russia, while the “caravan” stubbornly kept moving on, persistently looking through the proud Polish “gentry” and emphasizing the importance of its relationship with Old World grandees instead — the said Germans, French and Brits. At some point, both sides have understood that it cannot go on like this forever, yet there were no opportunities to change that foreign policy without a respective diplomatic supply. Then a grievous thing happened. Smolensk disaster took the toll of President Lech Kaczínski and the prominent members of Polish political establishment. It seemed that an aviation catastrophe should have caused a diplomatic one — an ultimate opportune moment imaginable to accuse Russia of all the deadly sins. But then…a “miracle” happened. Meeting Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk at the Smolensk airfield, Vladimir Putting got carried away by some sort of a sixth sense, took over the initiative and unexpectedly (even for himself, perhaps) hugged Polish Prime Minister. This embrace, pictured by numerous reporters, has filled the global media headlines. We might argue whether that was merely a display of political hunch or a sincere burst of emotions but one thing is clear: this gesture has done what all the diplomats of both countries have been failing to do for years — it reversed the bilateral Russo-Polish relationship. This is diplomacy at its best.

Analyzing Iranian foreign policy today, the words “Learn from that, gentlemen!” never leave the tip of my tongue. Iran is at an extremely sophisticated foreign-policy situation at the moment. Major part of the global community is, putting it mildly, slightly hostile to it. At the same time, Iran has hardly made a single hostile or aggressive move towards any state at all. American and Israeli accusations of attempts to create nuclear weapon lie outside of international legal framework. I have profoundly described this issue in the article “Iranian nuclear program and the international legislation”. There I also asked: “It is unclear what may condition the heightened interest for Iranian nuclear program — apart from political rhetoric — in a situation like that?” Weird as it may seem, the rhetoric is the key here. It is the variety of obscure Iranian foreign-policy moves that have driven Iran to its current “outcast-state” situation, damaging Iranian economy and threatening its national security: claims of Iranian supreme leaders “to wipe Israel off the world map” — although taken out of context or poorly translated (as Iranians claim) — denial of Holocaust, hosting international anti-Zionist congress in Tehran, the promise to enrich uranium up to 90% level and close the Strait of Hormuz (along with other mysterious diplomatic gestures). It is worth mentioning that the two last suggestions are pretty vague. Given Ayatollah Khamenei statements, who proclaimed the creation of nuclear weapon a sin, Iranian top brass claims about its existence cannot seem anything but weird. The idea to block the Strait of Hormuz, then, actually belongs to Stratfor CEO George Friedman. Several years ago head of this “shadow CIA” mentioned that Iran had a more noxious weapon than an atomic bomb — namely the blocking of Strait of Hormuz. Obviously provocative idea of retired American intelligence officer has seemingly suited the taste of Iranian President, who failed to see through this sly “double-bottom” initiative. As for anti-Israeli, if not anti-Semitic Iranian rhetoric, it is barely appropriate either. At home Iran is quite tolerant to its Jewish citizens. According to numerous specialists, it is exactly Iran, which managed to create the most favorable conditions for the Jewish community out of all Middle-Eastern states (apart from Israel itself, of course). Then what’s the point of pulling the leg of global community — already extremely intolerant to the displays of xenophobia — with the “fight against Zionism” that aggravates Iranian isolation furthermore?

The former U.S. Secretary of State, Nobel Prize winner Henry Kissinger, whom Vladimir Putin called a “keen expert on Russo-American relations” once said: “Diplomacy is an art of controlling power”. It’s not a secret that neither Iran, nor Russia (nor even China) are able to equal the military power of the U.S.-led NATO bloc. Isn’t it right about time for Iranian foreign-policy body to resort to this art? Iran — a natural geopolitical ally of Russia — fetched itself in a sophisticated international situation. Unfavorable scenario of its development might damage geopolitical interests of our country, too. Despite the readiness of Iranian trade partners to withstand the economic sanctions imposed by the European Union and the USA, they still might push Iranian economy to the verge of sheer survival, substantially degrading the living standards of common Iranians. Popular English writers of the 80s, authors of political TV series “Yes, Minister” and “Yes, Prime Minister” Jonathan Lynn and Antony Jay have enriched the diplomatic folklore with a following phrase: “Diplomacy is about surviving to the next century, politics is about surviving until Friday afternoon”. I would like to hope that Iranian state will find the stomach to resort to language of diplomacy, and, following the greatest traditions of Persian diplomacy (praised by Thucydides and Herodotus), start the dialogue with the European Union, the USA and Israel as it was done by Artaxerxes II, who skillfully balanced between the interests of Spartans and Greeks during the Peloponnesian War.

In the today’s entanglement of American, Israeli, Saudi and Turkish interests, Iran could have worked out the new sort of diplomacy, seeking for partners, if not allies. Turkey actively trumpets its new Middle Eastern role, laying claims for being the main champion of Palestinians and deliberately aggravating its relationship with Israel. Saudi Arabia, while hypocritically acting in the same manner, simultaneously serves the U.S. interests and funds the Wahhabi movements all over the world — from Pakistan and Afghanistan to Russian Northern Caucasus and Maghreb. Amongst players like that, Iran (paradoxically as it may seem at first glance) might cast its eyes upon Israel. Contemporary diplomacy has acquired yet another dimension lately — people’s diplomacy. Today the impact of information technology on social and political life is the word of the day. Arab revolutions are dubbed the Facebook revolutions.

A certain fan-page has been created by Israeli recently in this popular social network, whose population is about to step over one billion people. The page is called “Iranians, we love you and we don’t want the war”. Its creation was preceded by the first Israeli rally for peace with Iran. On Saturday, Mar 24, more than a thousand people, protesting against the policy of Netanyahu government “hawks”, gathered in Tel-Aviv. For now, only Iranians living abroad have joined the fan-page. Perhaps, enthusiasts of Israeli-Iranian reconciliation will appear in Iran itself. Yet, in order for people’s Israeli-Iranian diplomacy to come true, at least the Iranian ban on Facebook access should be lifted. Iran and Israel have common enemies — Saudi Arabia and Turkey. A platitude exclaimed by French 19^th century historian and philosopher Ernest Renan comes to mind: “Enemy of my enemy is my friend”.

In the context of Iranian foreign policy an important “Iranian issue” of Russo-American relationship cannot be bypassed. Recent tension at Moscow-Washington axis was conditioned by the deployment of the third strategic sector of American NMD system in Europe. The White House claimed the Iranian missile threat to be the major reason behind this decision. Quotes of Russian political shares at American exchange largely depend upon Russian skill of negotiating with Iran on the matters of global international security matters. Unfortunately, coordination of Moscow and Tehran efforts is far from being ideal. This is a perfect time for a slight diplomatic gesture of Iran towards Russia; the one that would let the West understand that Tehran listens to Moscow. Here’s a little something regarding the foreign policy gestures, by the way. During the Seoul summit on Mar 27, right after meeting with Recep Erdoğan Barack Obama waved to Turkish Foreign Affairs Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, telling him to come over. This triggered the scandal in Turkey, where oppositional People’s Republican Party treated the gesture of American President as an insult aimed at Turkey itself. Ruling Justice and Development Party had to explain this ill Obama’s gesture as an evidence of close relationship between Turkey and the USA. Iranian “threat” caused yet another scandal during the same summit. “Microphone leak” of a conversation between Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama was also connected to the U.S. NMD. Obama’s request to give him time until the November re-election and to inform Vladimir Putin of the conversation subject has also started quite a hype in the media. Weirdly enough, Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs made no statements regarding this issue of vital importance. Russia does care about Iranian lot, but as of now, the level diplomatic interaction does not match the importance of our relations. Foreign Ministry of any country knows a thousand and one way to prevent the rash official statements from leaking into the media.

To our sincere regret, these measures are not 100% efficient. It only takes to remember expansive quips of Russian ambassador to Ukraine Viktor Chernomyrdin that have repeatedly hindered Russo-Ukrainian relations. Examples of that are aplenty in any country. That’s the reason why I would like to remind everyone involved into the system of international security the classic remark of Winston Churchill: “True diplomat would think twice before saying nothing”.