"Following the start of the presidency of Donald Trump, we have entered the most hostile era in the history of US-Iran relations, and hostility is not a new phenomenon in relations between the two countries. For the past forty years, the US governments have sought to change the regime or so-called containment of Iran, except Barack Obama's second term in office, which experienced 'interactions' politics,” the senior expert noted.
He went on to say that "of course in Trump’s presidency the cruelest sanctions not only in the nuclear issue, but in all respects have been imposed against 80 million Iranians. In this era, for the first time in the history of relations, the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC), a part of the Iranian National Army, has been designated as a terrorist organization and to zero Iran's oil exports has been on the agenda.”
Princeton University researcher stated that "In Trump era, we are faced with a confusing strategy about Iran. Trump says he does not seek war and regime change, and wants dialogue to ensure Iran does not gain access to a nuclear bomb. Mike Pompeo, by setting 12 conditions is aiming to surrender Iran's government and bring about regime change. John Bolton has been dreaming of a military strike against Iran for many years, while all three agree on a maximum pressure strategy.”
Mousavian went on to say, "First, we will examine Trump's claim that he is only seeking to ensure that Iran does not have access to a nuclear bomb. From the United States' point of view, Iran's nuclear program was considered the first national security threat, while Iran is a member of the NPT, it does not have a nuclear bomb, and countries like Israel, India and Pakistan have bombs in the region. Anyway, the United States and Iran had 18 months of direct talks with the participation of world powers that eventually the JCPOA after twelve years was agreed upon.”
"Nuclear scientists are united in the world, the JCPOA is the most comprehensive document in the history of non-proliferation and the practical program to a produce a bomb is zero," said a former nuclear negotiator. “As a result of the JCPOA, Iran has accepted the highest transparency and commitment that no other country has accepted. The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed fifteen times that Iran has fulfilled all its obligations. If Trump says right that he is pursuing zero bomb and that Iran has implemented the most comprehensive nuclear zero bomb program in the world's nuclear history, then what is he looking for and why is Iran accused of trying to make a nuclear bomb?”
He reiterated, "But on Pompeo's claim!" He claims that he wants Iran to be a normal country. If an international agreement is reached, if the United Nations Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency have confirmed that Iran has complied with all its obligations, and if the whole world acknowledges that the United States has violated its obligations, then which of the two countries should adopt a normal conduct? Iran or America?”
Mousavian expressed that "Ultimately, the responsibility of John Bolton is clear, and everyone knows that he is pursuing a war and the breakup of Iran, and so it is not necessary to explain. At the same time, the fact is that the current US problem with Iran is not about nuclear issues, but the region because the US government knows well that Iran's nuclear program has not diversion, and Iran is not looking for a nuclear bomb.”
"On the current situation in the Middle East, the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia have argued that Iran is the main source of instability in the region, and Iran believes that the US is causing instability in the region," he noted. “But at today's meeting, we can understand and agree that the main driver of regional instability and crises is the wars that have taken place in recent years. In this case, the truth is that it was America that invaded Afghanistan, not Iran, it was America that invaded Iraq, not Iran, it was Saudi Arabia which attacked Yemen with US’ support and created the worst human disaster not Iran, it was the United States attacked Libya with NATO and its Arab allies and dismantled the country, not Iran.”
The researcher at the University of Princeton emphasized that "These are American wars that have displaced millions of people in the region, expanded terrorism and created civil wars in many countries, and in this crisis-affected region only one crisis was resolved via the diplomacy, and it was the Iranian nuclear crisis, which the United States also destroyed.”
Further in his remark, Mousavian referred to three basic principles for building lasting peace in the region: “First, we must unite on the principle of "No war"; the second is the "Diplomacy a priority" as a roadmap to forward, to solve crises through diplomacy by model of JCPOA. Third, to resolve any crisis in the region, "majority demand" and "minority rights" must be respected, "free elections" should be conducted under United Nations’ supervision, with the "new constitution", the foundations of real democracy is being laid. Until regional and global powers do not agree on these principles, there will be no sustainable solution.”
“Iran and the United States, despite all the hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq, supported the same model, but the problem with Afghanistan and Iraq was not a new political structure and principles, and the problem began after the defeat of the Taliban, the United States Insisted on the departure of Iran, and Iran left the United States alone with the Taliban, where half of Afghanistan is now in the hands of the Taliban, and the United States begs the Taliban. The problem with Iraq is terrorism, which is sponsored by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates militarily and financially," the former diplomat highlighted.
Mousavian responded to the audience's questions. In response to the question that "Trump pursues a policy of regime change that does not benefit the United States. Why do they think this policy is in the US’ interest? And where does America go with the support of Saudi Arabia who has terrorist mercenaries?" He said, "I agree with you. America has failed in the policy of regime change over the past 40 years, and will also fail in the future. In the years to come, we might see a change in American sovereignty and Bolton's departure, but Iran's sovereignty will remain."
He added that the best way to deal with the conflict is through dialogue, before which the United States should abandon the policy of regime change, not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran, respect Iranian national sovereignty, and, if an agreement has been reached, there would be a guarantee of its implementation not to being violated like the JCPAO.”
“America and Europe, as well as all experts, know that the financial and ideological source of the most dangerous terrorism, such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda, is Wahhabism, whose mother is Saudi Arabia, which provides ideology and weapons. Even Trump during the election campaign said that Saudi Arabia was the first source of global terrorism, which led him openly saying that they had nothing but money and that the intention was to sell hundreds of billions of weapons to this crisis- hit region and to the regimes without democracy and dictator and destabilized in the region. Trump has made America lose its traditional and important allies, leaving only Israel and Saudi Arabia alone.
In response to another question that "Before the Iranian Revolution, the Shah of Iran, was like today Saudi Arabia for the United States and was overthrown. Last week, with a Saudi citizen, you wrote a joint article to improve Iran-Saudi relations. Did you know that after that article, what happened to the Saudi writer?" He said, "I wrote a joint article with Abdul Aziz Sagher in the New York Times. We have disagreements, but we believe that peace will not be possible without the cooperation of regional and global powers. I do not know whether Abdul Aziz's article was under pressure inside. A few days ago, CNN had a joint interview with us about the article, but Abdul Aziz repeated the same words as Adel al-Jubeir, whiteout one positive word. I spoke positively in respecting the content of the article.”
He went on to say, “However, regarding the improvement of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, the Iranian Foreign Minister proposed a non-aggression pact to prevent war and interference in the internal affairs of each other and the mutual threat, but the Saudis rejected it. Prior to that, the Iranian Foreign Minister proposed a forum for joint talks between Iran and the Persian Gulf states that the Saudis also rejected.
Mousavian highlighted, "But today's relationship between Trump and Saudi Arabia is interesting." Trump believes that they have nothing but money and he has to sell them weapons. The Saudis also think that this man is crazy and paid money to hire him to pursue his goals in the region by acting against Iran. For the time being, Saudi Arabia and Trump each believe they have recruited others and we will not go anywhere until the policy of such recruitment is in place.”
In the end, in response to the question "If the nuclear deal was being implemented, did it have the effect of eliminating a nuclear bomb in the world, including the US nuclear bombs?" He said, "During the talks, I and the nuclear scientists At Princeton University, supported diplomacy for a peaceful resolution of the nuclear crisis, and we had many articles and lectures. After the JCPOA, we believed that if the principles were to be regional and global, we would have a nuclear-free region and the world.”
Mousavian reiterated that "But I believe that there is still room for maneuver and that it has the capacity to do so, for example, Iran is implementing the Additional Protocol, but Saudi Arabia and 80 other countries is not. If the principles of the JCPOA is globalized, we will have a new non-proliferation treaty that, with its implementation, no country would be able to have a nuclear bomb.”
9455**2050
Follow us on Twitter @IrnaEnglish
Your Comment