Experts weigh in: Can Iran and US cooperate amid turmoil in Mideast?
One year after the onset of the war in Gaza, it is believed by many experts that the US and Iran are the two influential players in this conflict. For this reason, this question was raised in a conversation with several prominent Iranian and American experts: whether there is any scope for cooperation between the two sides to contain tensions in the Middle East.
By Shahab Shahsavari
Journalist
There are two main perspectives on the current tensions: first, that Tehran and Washington - as the main supporters of the Resistance Axis and Israel, respectively - can pressure their allies to reduce tensions. And second, that Israel (an ally of the US) and the Resistance Axis (an ally of Iran) are proxy forces engaged in a proxy war to serve the interests of the US and Iran, respectively. In both perspectives, the role of Tehran and Washington in the current conflict is significant.
Proponents of the first perspective, who make up a large portion of observers and analysts, believe that Iran and the US, each for their own interests and motivations, are opposed to the escalation of tensions in the region. They argue that, having found themselves in a situation where their allies have become embroiled in a widespread conflict, the two sides can interact with each other to prevent the conflict from spreading further and even cooperate to achieve a ceasefire and halt hostilities.
Among the experts, Michael Wahid Hanna, a researcher at the Crisis Group think tank, and Ahmad Dastmalchian, Iran’s former ambassador to Lebanon, believe that Iran and the US have different motivations for preventing the spread of war in the region, but since their goal is common, they can cooperate to reduce tensions.
On the other hand, there are experts who believe that the current war in the Middle East is, in fact, a confrontation between the US and Iran. Many conservative analysts and supporters of Israel in the US, as well as a number of conservative analysts in Iran, believe that Israel is responsible for protecting US interests and implementing US demands in the Middle East, while the Resistance Axis groups are Iran’s arms for implementing Iranian demands.
Whether Israel is an agent of the US in the Middle East or whether Washington is unable to control Israel due to the influence of the Israeli lobby is an issue that remains a subject of debate among American analysts. Thinkers like Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer argue that the US is unable to control Israel due to the influence of the Israeli lobby, despite its own wishes, while Jewish thinkers like Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky argue that Israel is an agent of US interests in the Middle East.
Among the experts, Hamidreza Azizi, taking into account recent developments, was somewhat closer to the view that, given Israel’s recent successes in damaging Hezbollah in Lebanon, the US is satisfied with the current trajectory of events and the approaching goal of weakening Iran’s allies in the region. Therefore, he believes that there is no possibility of interaction between Tehran and Washington to bring the region closer to reducing tensions and stopping the conflict.
Below are the answers of Michael Wahid Hanna, a researcher at the Crisis Group think tank, Sina Azodi, a professor at George Washington University, Hamidreza Azizi, a researcher at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, and Ahmad Dastmalchian, Iran’s former ambassador to Lebanon, to questions on this topic.
Two parallel lines in
one direction
Michael Wahid Hanna
Despite the contact between Iran and the US, it is a mistake to assume that the current situation in the region and the messages being exchanged mean that there is an opportunity for cooperation between the two countries. In reality, Iran and the US are working in parallel to avoid a comprehensive regional war.
I believe that the Biden administration has completely focused on reducing tensions in the region, and Iran is one of the main issues in this effort. Over the past year, there have been various forms of messaging and indirect communication between Iran and the US.
The channels for communication between Iran and the US have been one of the most important tools for managing expectations regarding current issues in the region.
From Iran’s perspective, there is hope that the Biden administration can control Israel, and on the other hand, the US is trying to convey the message to Iran that Tehran and its regional allies should reduce tensions and not exert more pressure for further retaliatory operations.
At the same time, it should not be forgotten that the calendar and political climate in the US, just a few weeks before the elections, are a very important variable.
There is no doubt that the Biden administration wants to avoid a comprehensive regional conflict that would draw the US into the region, but in the electoral climate, it faces limitations in communicating with Iran.
No prospect for interaction
Hamidreza Azizi
From last spring to the present, we have moved from a space where interaction between Iran and the US was underway and there was a sense that Tehran and Washington were inclined to reduce tensions, to a space where tensions are increasing every day and there is no clear prospect for interaction between the two sides.
Considering all the circumstances, there is no room for dialogue and tension reduction between Iran and the United States. There are factors in both countries that make it impossible to have a conversation or negotiations between Iran and the US at present. On the American side, Washington’s approach to Israel’s actions in the region, not just in Gaza but also in Lebanon, has changed, especially given the reactions of American officials to recent events in Lebanon.
I believe that the US approach has changed compared to what we saw in the first few months of the Gaza war. Currently, the emphasis and efforts on the American side to establish a ceasefire and stabilize the situation no longer exist. There are two main reasons for this. First, given the developments over the past year in Gaza and the several rounds of negotiations that reached the brink of a ceasefire, it became clear to the US that Benjamin Netanyahu’s domestic considerations as the Prime Minister of Israel mean that he does not want a ceasefire and intends to continue operations under any circumstances. Therefore, the levers that the US thought it could use to push Israel towards a ceasefire either failed or were never implemented, such as stopping arms shipments to Israel due to domestic considerations.
The second factor was the developments over the past month, which have led to a significant shift in the US approach to the war, and given Israel’s achievements on the ground and the blows it has dealt to Hezbollah, this has created hope in Washington that the project the US has been pursuing for years in Lebanon, which it could not implement as it wanted, is now being achieved by Israel. Washington sees these developments as a means to weaken the Iran axis in the region.
As Netanyahu said after the assassination of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, from the perspective of Israel and Washington, these events can be a move towards a new order in the region. Reports suggest that before the recent Israeli attacks on Lebanon, Biden’s advisors gave Netanyahu the green light for these actions. It appears that these actions are being taken in the interests of the US. As long as Washington sees this potential in Israel to change the balance of power in the region in its favor, the US will not be inclined to reduce tensions.
In my opinion, on the Iranian side, given the situation of Iran’s allies, particularly Hezbollah, it is such that showing a willingness to engage in diplomacy is interpreted as weakness, and therefore Iran, as far as I have observed, presents its messages to the West in the form of warnings rather than a willingness to interact. Iran openly states that if the war expands to Iran, it will respond extensively.
In my opinion, both sides are currently trying to change their red lines and draw new ones. As long as this process is underway and field developments are changing the political landscape, I don’t think there is a real prospect for reducing tensions. The only area for interaction is the issue of Iran itself, and Washington’s concern is that the war should not turn into a direct war between Iran and Israel.
Otherwise, the step-by-step operations that Israel continues to carry out against Iran’s allies in the form of limited operations are supported by the United States. However, the disagreement is that if Israel responds strongly to Iran’s recent military operations and this response goes beyond the usual rules of engagement, it may put the achievements Israel has made so far at risk, and more importantly for Washington, it may put US interests in the region at risk.
For these reasons, I don’t see a prospect for interaction between Iran and the US. We need to consider that due to the upcoming elections, the US is focused on the presidential elections in a few weeks, and it does not want a major crisis to occur in the foreign policy sphere that would have significant and direct impacts on US interests, in a way that would require direct US intervention, either extensive or limited. In any case, the US wants to be in the loop of Israel’s plans and not be caught off guard.
In fact, Washington wants the achievements Israel has made so far in countering Iran’s allies to be preserved and, at the same time, it prefers that nothing happens that Iran gets extensively involved in the conflict. Let’s not forget that it was last spring that there was talk of an unwritten understanding between Iran and the US for a prisoner exchange, the release of frozen Iranian assets, and a reduction in tensions between the two countries, including avoiding attacks by Iran’s allies on US interests and US non-interference in Iran’s secret oil exports.
If Mr. [Masoud] Pezeshkian had been elected as president last spring and had raised the slogan of improving relations with the West, we would have been facing a different situation. However, after Hamas’s operations last fall and the start of the war in Gaza, we are facing different realities in the region, including attacks by Iran’s allies on US interests, which, after the killing of US personnel and extensive US attacks on the positions of Iran’s allied groups in Iraq, were resumed as part of the previous understanding between Tehran and Washington.
As a result, from last spring to the present, we have moved from a space where interaction between Iran and the US was underway and there was a sense that Tehran and Washington were inclined to reduce tensions, to a space where tensions are increasing every day and there is no clear prospect for interaction between the two sides.
Resolving Iran-US issues after Gaza War
Ahmad Dastmalchian
To stop the current conflicts in the Middle East, the most effective step the Americans should take is to stop Israel’s countless crimes in the region. The whole world is united in condemning Israel’s actions in the region, considering them to be against international and humanitarian laws and norms. There is no doubt that the focal point of the current crisis in the Middle East is the Israeli war in Gaza and, more recently, Lebanon.
Currently, there are two perspectives on the role of the US in the current situation in the Middle East. Some analysts and observers believe that the US and Iran are trying to manage the crisis. From this perspective, it seems that there is a shared understanding between Iran and the US, which, unlike Netanyahu, who wants to expand the crisis to save his own political fate, Tehran and Washington do not have an inclination to expand the conflict due to their own interests. Of course, Iran and the US have different motivations. Iran has its own reasons and motivations, and the US has its own. Direct and indirect talks between Iran and the US to prevent the escalation of tensions in the region began during the presidency of the late President Ebrahim Raisi.
In my opinion, now is a good opportunity to create a connection between Tehran and Washington and prevent the situation from getting out of control. If a widespread war breaks out in the region, it will not only put Iran’s interests at risk, but also those of the US. Given the predicted dire situation ahead, it is essential for the US to take the initiative and engage in constructive dialogue with effective parties in the region. Although the US is currently on the eve of elections and the government is heavily focused on domestic affairs, I believe that after the elections, Washington will be more active in containing tensions and crisis in the Middle East and will enter into negotiations and dialogue.
Of course, there is another perspective that some observers and analysts believe that Israel is, in fact, carrying out US orders, and what Israel is doing in the Middle East is advancing US desires and plans in the region. I do not entirely agree with this perspective. In my opinion, there is no basis or will for direct confrontation from the US.
Based on the US approach to managing and containing the crisis, the US intends to take a high-risk approach to confronting Iran, and as long as the US does not have such an intention, Iran also does not have an inclination to engage in such a confrontation. Such a confrontation is possible only if the crisis in the region completely gets out of control, and in that case, the situation will change, and it is unclear what situation the Middle East will face. But as long as crisis management is implemented by both sides, there is no reason for direct confrontation between Iran and the US in the region.
To stop the current conflicts in the Middle East, the most effective step the Americans should take is to stop Israel’s countless crimes in the Middle East. The whole world is united in condemning Israel’s actions in the region, considering them to be against international and humanitarian laws and norms. There is no doubt that the focal point of the current crisis in the Middle East is the Israeli war in Gaza and, more recently, Lebanon.
Both the US and its Western allies agree that the Gaza war must end, the path for humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza must be opened, and a ceasefire must be established. Almost all world leaders, not just Muslim countries, but Western countries and even the US, constantly emphasize the need for a ceasefire in Gaza as a prerequisite for stopping the conflict, at least in word. The focal point of the current crisis in the Middle East is the Gaza war.
If the countries of the region, Iran, and the US, in cooperation with other countries of the world, can tame Netanyahu through interaction and cooperation and stop the continuation of this war, I believe that other issues between us and the US can be reviewed in a negotiating process and resolved in the same way that was done previously in the framework of the JCPOA, within the framework of national interests.
The full article was first published
by Persian-language Hammihan daily.