Military Review

"Iran remains a closed country for the West"

"Iran remains a closed country for the West"“One of the reasons for the seizure of the embassy by the Iranians was the desire to prevent the repetition of the events of 53. Revolutionaries needed hostages to thwart possible operations of American intelligence services, ”historian Nikita Filin told VIEW VIEW, commenting on the behavior of Iran’s current president Hassan Rouhani during the Islamic revolution that turned 35 years old.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani spoke at a ceremony marking the 35 anniversary of the Islamic Revolution on Tuesday. With his speech, Rouhani confirmed the reputation of a cautious and moderate politician. On the one hand, he swore allegiance to the ideals of the 1979 revolution of the year and repeatedly threatened “external aggressors” who would dare to attack Iran. On the other hand, Rouhani never mentioned either the United States or Israel, did not allow himself any direct attacks against the West, which were often heard from the mouth of predecessor President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

“No country has been able to defeat us,” ITAR-TASS quoted the president. - The Islamic Republic held out against sanctions. Our country continues the path of development. "

According to SalamNews, the president stressed: in the last election, the Iranian people proved to be a supporter of the revolution. “Over time, we are getting closer to achieving the goals of the revolution,” the Iranian president stressed.

At the same time, speaking of the changes that had taken place since the beginning of his reign, Rouhani noted, not without pride: “Today, six months after the beginning of the work of the new government, in universities and the press, we see that the atmosphere has become more free. The society has also gained more peace. ”

A significant part of the jubilee speech of the Iranian president was devoted to foreign policy - here Rouhani focused on "constructive dialogue with other countries on terms of mutual respect and equality." “In negotiations with the 5 + 1 group on the nuclear program, we want to say that Iran is not seeking enmity, confrontation with any country,” Rowhani stressed. At the same time, the president noted that Iran is determined to continue development in the field of nuclear technologies.

About the role played by the current president of Iran in the 1979 revolution, in an interview with the VZGLYAD newspaper, an employee of the Center for the Study of the Near and Middle East of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, candidate historical Nikita Filin.

VIEW: Nikita Aleksandrovich, what is Rouhani himself and his colleagues referring to the events of 35-year-old? Are they different in this from conservatives?

Nikita Filin: Both Rouhani and “more conservative Iranian politicians” consider the Islamic Revolution a boon to Iran, they simply interpret its conquests in different ways. Of the current Rouhani supporters in the 80s, many were fervent conservatives, radicals. They advocated total Islamization of all aspects of life. But at the beginning of 90's, they were ousted from the political arena and later returned with reformist slogans. Pragmatics prevail over ideology, when it is profitable, you can soften accents a little. I think that representatives of this camp perceive the events of 35 years ago differently than the so-called conservatives.

LOOK: When did Islamic revolutionaries in general split into reformers and conservatives?

N.F.: The division arose for the reason that as a result of the revolution many forces won at once, supporters of Khomeini were only one of them. For several years, they sought access to the levers of power, and as a result of this struggle to the 1983 year, apart from them, there was no other force left - the last was banned by the Tude Communist Party.

After this, disagreements began already among the adherents of Khomeini's ideas. One wing rested on supporters among the bazaar, the market, the economic elite, the other wing — Imamists — had no such supporters. And it was believed that the "bazaars" were more democratic, and the "Imamists" - conservative. Among the “Imamists”, however, was a group of conditional centrists, inclined to moderate reforms. Rouhani was one of them.

This division played its role, and, ultimately, the only party that remained at that time, the “Party of the Islamic Republic,” was dissolved in 1987 due to these contradictions. When a new Majlis gathered in 1988, the situation was such that he could not pass enough laws, since the president was a supporter of the “bazaar” Ali Khamenei, the prime minister was Muscavi’s Imamist, the Majlis also consisted of opponents of the “bazaar” the Supervisory Board, in contrast, consisted of most supporters of economic democratization. This stalemate caused a rather serious crisis.

LOOK: It is known that Rouhani himself sided with Ayatollah Khomeini, while still a very young man. What role did he play in the revolution?

N. F.: It began its activities in the early 60-ies. Being a rather charismatic young leader, he began to travel around Iran and preach against the Shah's government. In those years, he was arrested several times, forbidden to speak. He then supported Imam Khomeini, who in 1964 began the fight against the Shah.

By the way, there is an opinion that it was he who began to call Khomeini an "imam", and although this title did not agree with the Iranian tradition, however, he took root in the people. Before the revolution, he had to emigrate, and he joined Khomeini, who lived in exile in France. And February 1 1979, Rouhani returned with him to Iran.

Nevertheless, it cannot be called "especially close" to Khomeini. After the Islamic Revolution, although he held quite serious posts, these posts were parliamentary, for example, he was a vice speaker.

VIEW: How did Rouhani establish himself during the war with Saddam Hussein? He was a supporter of the struggle to the bitter end, or called for negotiations?

N. F .: During the war with Iraq, he showed himself rather a hardliner. He was a member of the High Council of Defense and at one time headed its executive committee, was deputy commander-in-chief, commander of the operational center and even commanded the air defense forces. He coordinated actions, but he was never a “negotiator”.

VIEW: As is known, relations between Tehran and Washington are still poisoned by an epic with hostages from the American embassy. How did that takeover of the embassy affect the US foreign and domestic policy?

N. F .: These events cost President Carter a post. It was because of the hostage situation that he lost the election to Reagan. He could not solve the problem peacefully, moreover, the special squad sent by him to free the hostages was also unable to complete the task and suffered great losses himself.

As is known, the CIA in Iran began to manifest itself during the reign of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1951 – 1953. It was the CIA that contributed to the overthrow of Mosaddyk. In this regard, one of the reasons for the seizure of the embassy by the Iranians was the desire to prevent the repetition of the events of 53. The revolutionaries needed hostages to stop the possible operations of the American special services.

The Americans reacted to the situation very painfully, it was a huge snap on the nose. They simply could not imagine that any country could do this way with the US Embassy and its diplomats. Indeed, it still leaves an imprint on how Americans relate to Iran, and prevents rapprochement.

VIEW: Did the Americans admit their guilt for these events, for interfering in the internal affairs of Iran? For the fact that the United States supported the brutal tyrannical regime of the Shah there?

N. F .: If we look at the American political situation, they don’t recognize or even know a lot. But there is a scientific community, a huge number of monographs have appeared on the causes and causes of the revolution, and the community recognizes that all this was in fact. Only English monographs turned out more than fifty!

It was important for American researchers, including those of Iranian origin, to understand why these events took place in Iran, why American politics failed so badly in this situation. After all, the revolution was a big surprise for America. True, we must admit that for the USSR too. When Brezhnev then congratulated the Iranian people on a successful revolution, no one yet knew what it would lead to.

VIEW: Carter’s then national security adviser to the United States, Zbigniew Brzezinski, called for an immediate invasion of Iran to save the Shah’s regime. Many years later, George W. Bush returned to the idea of ​​attacking Iran ... Can we say that the threat of a US war against an Islamic republic has now been eliminated?

N. F .: Yes, under President George W. Bush, such thoughts were voiced, and the American media prepared the nation for a possible campaign against Iran. Now, after the events of the Arab Spring, the geopolitical situation in the Middle East has changed. Plus, the situation in Syria, in which Iran plays a very significant role. Plus, the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. All this forces sensible American politicians to consider Iran as an important player and continue their attempts at negotiations.

VIEW: Why is Hollywood still returning to the theme of the 1979 revolution of the year? How realistic are these events described, for example, in Ben Affleck's “Argo Operation” last year?

N. F .: Iran remains a closed country for the West, to some extent is an incomprehensible threat, and this stirs up interest.

I would not say that all moments are true in the same “Operation“ Argo ”. There are errors in the details. For example, one of the employees of the American embassy appears on the market without a headscarf - and everyone points at her with her fingers. Already by the 80 years, women were completely forbidden to go out with their heads uncovered, so its appearance on people in this form was almost impossible. In general, the plot is too wound up, in fact, everything was much more prosaic. I am sure that the Iranians did not make any chase after them, for example.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Name
    Name 13 February 2014 09: 18
    "Iran remains a closed country for the West, to some extent it is an incomprehensible threat, and this stirs up interest ..."-that's just not for Russia, this "woman has been read", and even China ... Iran "bit the bridle" and sat next to the "Island of Freedom" ...What does that union promise ...
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 13 February 2014 13: 42
      Quote: name
      "Iran remains a closed country for the West, to some extent it is an incomprehensible threat, and this stirs up interest ..."-that's just not for Russia, this "woman has been read", and even China ... Iran "bit the bridle" and sat next to the "Island of Freedom" ...What does that union promise ...

      One small nuance, one of the fundamental concepts of Iran's foreign policy is the export of the "Islamic Revolution", and regardless of the wishes and interests of the potential "importer" ... request

      - Iran has been carrying out anti-Azerbaijani propaganda since the establishment of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. Huge amounts of money are being spent on this propaganda policy. The reason is that Iran believes that if Azerbaijan created an independent, democratic state, then this is supposedly a threat to the integrity of Iran. They fear that more than 35 of millions of Azerbaijanis living in Iran may someday want to secede and join today's Azerbaijan.
      Iran does not want Azerbaijan to be an independent, democratic and secular state. Therefore, the Iranian special services carry out propaganda among unenlightened and uneducated people, take them to Gum and Mashhad, recruit them there, and then send them to Azerbaijan to organize the Islamic revolution and try to join Azerbaijan to Iran.

      The Islamic revolution in Iran of the 1979 of the year served as the starting point for many attempts to export the revolution.
      The Shiite regime almost simultaneously with the seizure of power in Tehran in 1979 began planning to expand the revolution to predominantly Shiite Iraq, Northern Yemen, and from 1982 to Lebanon. For this, the Codes special service was created (which created Hezbollah). In the 1980 year, Iraq attacks Iran, one of the reasons for the attack is Iran's ongoing attempts to introduce the idea of ​​the Islamic Revolution into Iraqi society. At one time, the leader of the revolution, Ayatollah Ruholla Musavi Khomeini, urged the Soviet leader Gorbachev to accept Islam and turn the USSR into a “Union of Islamic Soviet Republics” ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
  2. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 13 February 2014 10: 32
    It is too early to talk about a possible alliance, "the east is a delicate matter," but military-technical cooperation and joint work to protect Syria's interests must be deepened and developed.
  3. Leshka
    Leshka 13 February 2014 11: 26
    Iran is a good ally
    1. alone
      alone 13 February 2014 20: 17
      Quote: Leshka
      Iran is a good ally

      Iran is not your ally
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 13 February 2014 22: 19
        Quote: lonely
        Iran is not your ally

        Here it is necessary to clearly separate the Islamic states and secular states from the dominant religion of Islam. Islamic states are not friends to us, even if they are enemies for the United States.
  4. Corsair
    Corsair 13 February 2014 13: 00
    Quote: article title
    "Iran remains a closed country for the West"

    I will not go into the analysis of the article, I will only write that the USSR, having "opened up" to the West, ceased to exist ...
  5. Evkur
    Evkur 13 February 2014 16: 32
    I am sure the Iranians went to the shores of the United States only with the permission of themselves, otherwise it looks like suicide! There’s some kind of scent of agreement on this trip! I think it is necessary to raise the rating of the president supposedly in front of the people - they say the enemy is not asleep and already on the borders of our great America urgent measures are needed! Something the Americans and the British have conceived, but in order for the plan to be realized, it is necessary for the simple people to start misinforming and how, in South Ossetia, by creating an information pillow, it will be possible to CREATE democracy!
  6. vlad.svargin
    vlad.svargin 13 February 2014 17: 09
    On the sidelines of the Munich conference, US Secretary of State John Kerry, in a personal conversation, strongly recommended to Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif "to reduce activity in restoring economic ties with EU members, since the issue of sanctions against Iran has not yet been closed." Zarif, in his usual mildly ironic manner, smiling broadly and adjusting his glasses, replied with a question: “You did not manage to secure the economic blockade of our country at the height of the conflict, do you really expect to do it now, during the warming period?” (“How did Iran oppose attempts by the United States to strangle the country's economy "Ikram Sabirov)

    The United States, excitedly telling the whole world about how they "forced" Tehran to sit at the negotiating table with sanctions, will never admit that these punitive measures have, by and large, failed. Washington began to introduce them immediately after the 1979 revolution, when there was no talk of any nuclear program. In the case of methodical and consistent strangulation of Iran, all American presidents noted - from Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama. The result? By the beginning of the “anti-nuclear sanctions”, Iran had 194 centrifuges for uranium enrichment, now their number, according to various estimates, is from 11 to 13 thousand. At the height of the “crippling sanctions” regime, the Islamic Republic launched into the space communications satellites and two bio-objects.
    During the same period, the Iranian auto industry took a leading position in the unassuming market of the Middle East and South Asia, and the successes of the Iranian cybersecurity service caused genuine concern in the same United States. ("How Iran opposed the US attempts to strangle the country's economy" Ikram Sabirov)