Hassan Rouhani writes:
Three months ago, my platform of “prudence and
hope” gained a broad, popular mandate. Iranians embraced my approach to
domestic and international affairs because they saw it as long overdue. I’m
committed to fulfilling my promises to my people, including my pledge to engage
in constructive interaction with the world.
The world has changed. International politics is
no longer a zero-sum game but a multidimensional arena where co-operation and
competition often occur simultaneously. Gone is the age of blood feuds. World
leaders are expected to lead in turning threats into opportunities.
The international community faces many challenges
in this new world – terrorism, extremism, foreign military interference, drug
trafficking, cybercrime and cultural encroachment – all within a framework that
has emphasised hard power and the use of brute force.
We must pay attention to the complexities of the
issues at hand to solve them. Enter my definition of constructive engagement.
In a world where global politics is no longer a zero-sum game, it is – or
should be – counterintuitive to pursue one’s interests without considering the
interests of others.
A constructive approach to diplomacy doesn’t mean
relinquishing one’s rights. It means engaging with one’s counterparts, on the
basis of equal footing and mutual respect, to address shared concerns and
achieve shared objectives. In other words, win-win outcomes are not just
favourable but also achievable. A zero-sum, Cold War mentality leads to
everyone’s loss.
Sadly, unilateralism often continues to
overshadow constructive approaches. Security is pursued at the expense of the
insecurity of others, with disastrous consequences. More than a decade and two
wars after 9/11, al-Qa’ida and other militant extremists continue to wreak
havoc.
Syria, a jewel of civilisation, has become the scene of heartbreaking
violence, including chemical weapons attacks, which we strongly condemn. In
Iraq, 10 years after the American-led invasion, dozens still lose their lives
to violence every day. Afghanistan endures similar, endemic bloodshed.
The unilateral approach, which glorifies brute
force and breeds violence, is clearly incapable of solving issues we all face,
such as terrorism and extremism. I say all because nobody is immune to
extremist-fuelled violence, even though it might rage thousands of miles away.
Americans woke up to this reality 12 years ago.
My approach to foreign policy seeks to resolve
these issues by addressing their underlying causes. We must work together to
end the unhealthy rivalries and interferences that fuel violence and drive us
apart. We must also pay attention to the issue of identity as a key driver of
tension in, and beyond, the Middle East.
At their core, the vicious battles in Iraq,
Afghanistan and Syria are over the nature of those countries’ identities and
their consequent roles in our region and the world. The centrality of identity
extends to the case of our peaceful nuclear energy programme.
To us, mastering
the atomic fuel cycle and generating nuclear power is as much about
diversifying our energy resources as it is about who Iranians are as a nation,
our demand for dignity and respect and our consequent place in the world.
Without comprehending the role of identity, many issues we all face will remain
unresolved.
I am committed to confronting our common
challenges via a two-pronged approach. First, we must join hands constructively
to work toward national dialogue, whether in Syria or Bahrain. We must create
an atmosphere where peoples of the region can decide their own fates. As part
of this, I announce my government’s readiness to help facilitate dialogue
between the Syrian government and the opposition.
Second, we must address the broader, overarching
injustices and rivalries that fuel violence and tensions. A key aspect of my
commitment to constructive interaction entails a sincere effort to engage with
neighbours and other nations to identify and secure win-win solutions. We and
our international counterparts have spent a lot of time – perhaps too much time
– discussing what we don’t want rather than what we do want.
This is not unique
to Iran’s international relations. In a climate where much of foreign policy is
a direct function of domestic politics, focusing on what one doesn’t want is an
easy way out of difficult conundrums for many world leaders. Expressing what one
does want requires more courage.
After 10 years of back-and-forth, what all sides
don’t want in relation to our nuclear file is clear. The same dynamic is
evident in the rival approaches to Syria.
This approach can be useful for efforts to
prevent cold conflicts from turning hot. But to move beyond impasses, whether
in relation to Syria, my country’s nuclear program or its relations with the
United States, we need to aim higher.
Rather than focusing on how to prevent
things from getting worse, we need to think – and talk – about how to make
things better. To do that, we all need to muster the courage to start conveying
what we want – clearly, concisely and sincerely – and to back it up with the
political will to take necessary action. This is the essence of my approach to
constructive interaction.
As I depart for New York for the opening of the
UN General Assembly, I urge my counterparts to seize the opportunity presented
by Iran’s recent election. I urge them to make the most of the mandate for
prudent engagement that my people have given me and to respond genuinely to my
government’s efforts to engage in constructive dialogue.
Most of all, I urge
them to look beyond the pines and be brave enough to tell me what they see – if
not for their national interests, then for the sake of their legacies, and our
children and future generations.
No comments:
Post a Comment