Iran- Arab Relations

Iran- Arab Relations
Fahmi Huwaidi
On Wednesday 24th of February, 2016 the institute for political and international
studies (IPIS) hosted Mr. Fahmi Huwaidi, the Egyptian scholar and journalist, for a
lecture on "Iran- Arab Relations". In this meeting Huwaidi mainly discussed on Iran`s
policies towards the Arab world.
This session was opened by Dr. Zahrani, Director General of IPIS, stated that “Egypt,
Iran and Turkey are the only three countries with established states in the Middle
East”. We are in the situation that everything is under change and these events remind
us of the 30 year war in Europe which changed everything such as state and
sovereignty. In the current situation, Egypt and Iran as two longstanding states should
predict crises and mange them since the foreign countries do not have an inclination
to prevent a crisis or that is not in line of their interest. So, it is necessary to analyze,
explain and predict these issues in this session based on a theoretical framework.
Then, mentioning his presence in the beginning of Islamic revolution in Iran, Huwaidi
stated that many issues have been changed during this time. We are witness of a new
world and new roles. At the first weeks of Islamic revolution I entered Iran as a
Muslim. Frankly speaking, Iranian toppled Shah and now they are defending Assad
government. At the same time, they are speaking about resistance axis in the region.
Today, there is no Arab country that is free of conflict. It is said that Iran supports the
oppressed. Of course all of us are oppressed. Districting Iran’s behavior during
different historical periods, Huwaidi referred that Iran’s project is respectful within its
own borders. Before the current developments, Iran had more influence in the Arab
world than now, because Iran supported Palestine incalculably but right now political
assessment of Iran is completely different”.
Then Dr. Zahrani followed Mr. Huwaidi, criticizing him: “if we want to scrutinize
whether Islamic revolution is in the right and proper path, the best criteria is the
1
Zionist regime. And the question raised here is that who benefits from the current
situation in the region more than Zionist regime. The second criterion is the popular
revolutions in which the presence of French and US ambassadors in Syrian transition is
a debatable issue. Some states which felt to be threatened from the events called Arab
spring or Islamic awakening, tried to display Syrian crisis as a sectarian issue and divert
this stream. The main problem in the Islamic world in general and Arab world in
particular is a small minority named Wahhabi who excommunicates the other religious
and sects”.
Reciting verse of Hojjorat of Holy Quran, Mr. Miryousefi, Director of Middle East
Studies Department of IPIS, considered Iran`s interference in Arab world and the issues
such as Shiite – Sunni division against to the Islamic principles, the holy Quran and the
universal human values and regarded them as a kind of racism. He also deemed the
allegation against Iran as a kind of propaganda in order to justify iron fist policy of
Saudi Arabia toward Arab revolution. Miryousefi also pointed out “focusing on
changing Syrian president, as the only problem in the region, is like those against Noori
Maleki in last year on which his dismissal was displayed as a resolution for all Iraqi
problems or before the Arab revolutions, It was also claimed that Iran`s support from
Palestinian aspirations and Hamas is the root cause of all Middle East problems since
Iran is the so-called opponent of Arab Peace Initiative. However Noori Malaki was
dismissed, Mosul is yet under occupation of Daesh”, he further added. Iran`s support
of Palestine and Hamas is considering now as a positive point of our policy, despite
previous propaganda. In addition, such claim like that Iran as a Persian country should
not intervene in Arab affairs is a form of racism and it is completely against the Islamic
and human principles. This claim means that Saudi Arabia has the right to cause the
death of hundreds of people through sending arms, money and Jihadist forces to Iraq
and Syria just because she is an Arab country but Iran should not concern about the
presence of terrorist groups near her borders and not have minimum contribution to
restoring peace and stability in the region just because she is not an Arab country. The
last point is that the current situation in the region is a result of Saudi’s feel of threat
from its own domestic and internal challenges rather than external challenges. Saudis
2
aim is justifying its repressive policies against the political stream in the region and
does not relate to Iran. Additionally, Iran is always opposed to any regime change in
the region, including Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and so on from outside the
region.
Replying to these criticisms, Fahmi Huwaidi said “I am talking about the common
points. The problem is not Arab and Persian. This is the Saudi Arabia’s view and Saudi
Arabia is not the representative of Arab world. It is not a proper assumption that we as
Arabs are being affected by Wahabbism. We are all the victims of our illusions and this
leads to disagreement among us. We should engage in dialogue based on the
realities”.
He further added according to the current assumption, we need freer expression. It is
thought that only one side is wrong; while, both sides must admit their own mistakes
in favor of mutual understanding. I still believe to dialogue and understanding but this
dialogue has some terms and conditions. Both sides still have dilutions and illusions
which should be dispelled. Mentioning Yemen current situation, Huwaidi expressed
“what does Iran want in Yemen? Does it want to clash with Saudi Arabia? I have heard
two kinds of arguments over Yemen from Iranians: the first is that we do not take any
measure in Yemen and the second is that Yemen people are oppressed and that`s why
we support them.
Expressing we are also under oppression in Egypt, Huwaidi commented “not only I do
not defend the Egyptian government but also criticize it and condemn the positions of
Egyptian state”.
Mentioning the Syrian crisis, he also emphasized that Takfiri groups even
excommunicate us and added that “what happened in Syria was the result of Syrian
reasonable demands. In fact, it was the narrowness of Syrian government that paved
the way for implementing foreign wills.
He further continued “I have been beside the Islamic revolution since 37 years ago but
when I criticized the policies adopted in Iran, I was blamed in such a way. It is not
rational that if we do not agree with you, we are Takfiri. Your view is respectful. You
support your state stance.”
3
Dr. Zahrani brought the session to a close, by some concluding points: “elites like you
should be the leader of thought in the region rather diplomats and generals direct the
public opinions of the region and Muslims. The intellectuals like you should address
these issues more serious than before and the effect of intellectual elites is more than
political and military elites. Zahrani also drew the attentions toward focusing on Islam
rather than the sectarian issues and Shiite – Sunni divisions and Egypt should be the
axes of these discussions. The other point is that defining common points is more
difficult than the common threats and we must pay attention what are the common
threats against Muslims. It is important to prioritize the common threats and the
common interests.
Dr Zahrani added that we should also discuss what should be the base of policy
making and explanation: revolution, identity or nation-state? Opting level of analysis is
quite difficult. The other important point that should be taken into consideration is
that the Saudi Arabia’s integrity and security is a principle for all the Muslims and all
have a consensus on that and this issue goes back to the existence of Haramain
Sharifain in Saudi Arabia and there is also consensus in Iran on the stability of Saudi
Arabia. This issue can be a common axis between our elites and you. We really want to
be told to Saudi’s friends that antagonistic approach towards Iran is simply not true
and cannot provide them with security.
The last but not least is that pondering and predictions based on dreams are one of the
most important pests for political, diplomatic and military elites that result in
miscalculations and it should be warned about these optimism. We should not have a
selective approach in our analyses; we should not only concentrate on Bahrain or
Syria. By this approach, we can have more realistic and scientific analyses.
Report prepared by : Fahimeh.Abbasi
4