Iranian conduct in the early days of the Trump administration
Issued on: 06/03/2017 Type: Article
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Overview
1. Donald Trump’s inauguration as president triggered a change in
the attitude of the US administration toward Iran and increased the
tension between the new administration and Tehran within a short while.
The change was reflected both by the escalation of anti-Iranian
rhetoric on the part of American senior officials, and first and foremost by
President Donald Trump, as well as by an expansion to a certain extent of the
economic sanctions against Iran. Even though both sides have so far
refrained from undesired escalation, the change in the stance of the US
administration strengthened the Iranian concern about the intentions of
the new president.
2. In their public reactions to the declarations by senior
officials of the US administration, Iranian senior officials usually tried to
belittle the significance of the threats on the part of Washington.
They warned the United States not to threaten Iran; They claimed that
those were idle threats and that the United States could do nothing against
Iran; They stressed that the US threats would not influence Iran and not change
its policy, including in relation to the missile program and Iran’s regional
policy. Senior Iranian military officials, on the other hand, adopted more
vehement rhetoric against the US, emphasizing Iran’s military power and
threatening the new administration not to dare act against Iran.
3. However, despite the Iranian public attempts to belittle the
significance of the change of the US administration, the ITIC believes
that an authentic Iranian concern about the policy of the Trump administration
is evident. Indeed, since President Trump entered office, Tehran became
even more convinced that he would not cancel the nuclear agreement, especially
in view of the opposition to such a step on behalf of the other powers which are
signatories to the agreement. On the other hand, there is increased
concern in Iran that more pressure would be exerted by the American
administration on Iran, which would deter European companies from entering
Iranian markets and foil Iran’s intention to bring about an economic improvement
following the nuclear agreement. In addition, it is evident
that the Iranians are concerned about the formation of an anti-Iranian regional
coalition and an American reaction to Iranian provocations against the US and
the international community.
4. In an initial attempt to respond to anti-Iranian steps by the
US, Iran evidently increases its diplomatic activity in the regional and
international arenas. President Rouhani’s recent visit to Oman
and Kuwait may indicate Iran’s increasing conviction that that it needs
to alleviate the tension in the region and improve its relations with its Arab
neighbors in the Persian Gulf. At the same time, Iran is acting in the
international arena to ensure that the other countries that signed the nuclear
agreement remain committed to it. Iran also strives to enhance its economic ties
with Russia, the Euro-Asian Union, and other countries.
5. In the domestic Iranian scene, President Hassan
Rouhani’s political opponents on the conservative right take advantage of the
tension with the Trump administration to exacerbate their criticism
against the president. As part of their attempts to express their
disapproval of the president prior to the upcoming elections for the Iranian
presidency, which are due to take place in May 2017, his opponents claim that
his policy of appeasement and his trust in the US administration have
led to the escalation in the US stance toward Tehran. However,
even the radical opponents refrain for the time being from calling for a
deliberate violation of the nuclear agreement on the part of Iran. It
is evident that even President Rouhani’s harsh critics prefer that the
responsibility for the possible collapse of the agreement, which wasn’t to their
liking in the first place, be borne by the US administration rather than
Iran.
6. In the ITIC's assessment, in spite of the mounting pressure on
the part of the US, Iran is not expected to change significantly the
essential elements of its policy, mainly with reference to its missile program,
its desire to achieve regional hegemony, and its support of terrorism, which,
from the perspective of the Iranian regime, serve its vital national
interests.In the ITIC's assessment, at most, Iran would be
willing to tone down publicly and partially its provocative behavior toward the
US and the international community. This includes detention of Western
nationals of dual citizenship, operating against US vessels in the Persian Gulf,
etc.[1] This is due to the fear of a retaliatory action by the US or
mounting American pressure, which may have an adverse influence on Western
countries’ willingness to expand their economic ties with Iran.
| 7. In conclusion, the ITIC believes that Iran will continue in its policy of testing the limits, while trying not to create situations that would get out of control, such as a blatant violation of the nuclear agreement. Iran will refrain as much as possible from providing the new administration with a pretext to engage in an aggressive action against it and to mobilize the support of the international community for that purpose. At the same time, Iran will continue its diplomatic efforts to strengthen its relations in the international arena (with an emphasis on European countries, Russia and East Asia), and alleviate as much as possible the regional tension, in order to make it difficult for the United States to mobilize international and regional support for an anti-Iranian coalition. |
The tension between Iran and the US after the inauguration of Donald Trump as president
8. Donald Trump’s inauguration as president on January 20, 2017,
created within a short while a significant change in the stance of the US
administration toward Iran and escalated the tension between the new
administration and Tehran. The test launch of a ballistic missile carried out by
Iran in late January 2017 triggered a wave of vehement statements by senior US
administration officials, and first and foremost by President Trump, against
Iran: Following the test launch, General Michael Flynn, the president’s
former national security adviser, declared that Iran “was on notice.” The
president himself sent a warning to Iran, accusing it of “playing with fire,” as
he put it, and made clear that he didn’t rule out a military action against it.
In an interview with Fox News (February 6, 2017), Trump called Iran the world’s
No. 1 terrorist state. He reiterated his previous criticism of the nuclear
agreement, which he had described as the “worst agreement he had ever seen.”
Trump’s Vice President Mike Pence declared in an interview with ABC News
(February 5, 2017) that Iran would act properly if it didn’t test the new
president’s resoluteness, and said that it must consider carefully its
belligerent and provocative actions.
9. The US administration did not settle with declarations. Following
the test launch of the ballistic missile, the US treasury announced on February
3, 2017, the imposing of economic sanctions against thirteen senior
officials (eight of whom were Iranians) and a dozen Iranian or Iran-affiliated
companies.
10. Even though both parties have so far refrained from escalating
measures, the American conduct increased the concern in Tehran of the
new president’s intentions. Statements made by Iranian officials
expressed the concern that the new American president would carry out the
threats he had made during the election campaign to cancel the nuclear agreement
and exacerbate sanctions on Iran on various pretexts, such as the continuation
of the long-range missile program, Iran’s regional policy, and the violation of
human rights.[2] This concern grew stronger after it had
turned out that the new administration was adamant to change the attitude taken
by the Obama administration and embrace a more aggressive line toward
Tehran.
The Iranian reaction to the threats of the Trump administration: belittling the significance of the American threats
11. In their public reactions to the statements by the US
administration senior officials, senior Iranian officials tried to
belittle the importance and significance of the threats by Washington.
They warned the United States not to threaten Iran; They claimed that
these were idle threats and that the US could not do anything against Iran; and
stressed that the American threats would not influence Iran and would not bring
about a change in its policy, including in relation to the missile
program and Iran’s regional policy.
12. In his first reaction to the threats by the United States,
Supreme Leader Khamenei declared that he thanked Trump for exposing the
United States’ true face to the world. In a speech he delivered to
Iranian Air Force officers on the eve of the Islamic Revolution Day, Khamenei
referred to Trump’s statement that Iran should thank the Obama administration
for its conciliatory policy toward it. Khamenei said that Iran had no reason to
thank an administration that imposed sanctions on Iran, created ISIS, set fire
to Iraq and Syria, and assisted the riots against the Iranian regime in the
summer of 2009. Khamenei reiterated his own stance that the “Great
Satan” (i.e., the United States) should not be trusted and no hopes should be
placed in those opposing the very existence of the Islamic regime in
Iran (the Supreme Leader’s website, February 7, 2017). In another
speech, Khamenei claimed that the US threats to take military action against
Iran were intended to deflect Iranian senior officials’ attention from
the true war waged by the US against Iran in the economic battlefield and the
cultural arena (the Supreme Leader’s website, February 15, 2017).
13. Other Iranian senior officials also belittled the
significance and the importance of the American threat:
A. President Hassan Rouhani
rejected the US threats. Talking to journalists on the anniversary of
the Revolution, Rouhani declared that the massive presence of Iranian citizens
in the Revolution Day rallies was intended to send a message to the US leaders
that they should refrain from threats and intimidation against the
Iranian people. Rouhani noted that during the 38 years that had passed
since the Revolution, the Iranian people proved that anyone talking to them in
the language of threats would have to regret that. He announced that the
American threats would not succeed in deterring Iran from continuing to follow
in the path of the Revolution (Fars News, February 10, 2017).
B. Foreign Minister Mohammad
Javad Zarif declared that the US threats against Iran do not affect it.
According to Zarif in an interview with NBC, Iran is not frightened by
the threats and the sanctions against it are ineffective. However, he pointed
out that his country does not desire any confrontation with the US (IRNA,
February 20, 2017).
C. “Iranian senior
officials”pointed out, in response to the US claims regarding the test
launch of the surface-to-surface missiles carried out by Iran that the
Iranian missile program is defensive in nature. According to
them, these tests do not represent any violation of the UN Security Council
resolutions because the missiles were not intended to carry nuclear warheads.
Ali-Akbar Velayati, the Supreme Leader adviser for international
affairs, declared that Iran would continue with its missile
program, which is intended for defense purposes only. Following the
statements by US National Security Adviser Flynn, who warned Iran after the test
that it had carried out in late January 2017, Velayati said that it wasn’t the
first time an unexperienced man from the US threatened Iran and that in time,
also President Trump would understand that hollow, vain statements against Iran
only damage his credibility (ISNA, February 2, 2017).
D. Iranian senior
officialsalso dismissed reports that the US administration intends to
designate the Revolutionary Guards a terror sponsoring organization.
Foreign Minister Zarif said that the United States has no
interest in doing so since the whole world knows that the Revolutionary Guards
provide the most support to the countries of the region in their struggle
against terror (Mehr, February 25, 2017). In an interview with Al-Jazeera,
Ali-Akbar Velayati said that Iran is not afraid of threats and
that an American operation against the Revolutionary Guards would not
influence their support of Hezbollah, Iraq and Syria (Fars News,
February 9, 2017).
E. Khamenei’s advisor Ali-Akbar
Velayatialso tried to calm the situation and said that a
military confrontation between Iran and the US is unlikely. In
an interview with the Tasnim News Agency (February 12, 2017), Velayati referred
to Trump as a “calculated man” and estimated that the American president would
not initiate a confrontation with a powerful country such as Iran, which may end
up in an unprecedented fiasco in American history. Velayati noted that the US is
not as strong today as it was when it attacked Iraq and Afghanistan, and that
Iran, in comparison, is stronger than these countries. Therefore, not only would
Trump not dare attack Iran, but conditions in the United States do not allow him
to act as he pleases.
14. Iranian media also tried to belittle the importance of
the US threats. A series of editorials published in recent weeks in the
Iranian media claimed that the threats by the new American
administration are baseless. Iranian commentators estimated that
President Trump is not interested in a military confrontation with
Iran since this is contradictory to his wish to address his country's
domestic matters as his top priority. Commentators also pointed out the weighty
constraints facing Trump, which have already forced him to back down from some
of his intentions, for instance, regarding the transfer of the US embassy in
Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Thus, for instance, the conservative daily
Javan (February 14, 2017) claimed that the new president is occupied
with domestic challenges and therefore cannot execute a military option against
Iran. The military threats by the US are part of a psychological war
conducted by Western media in an attempt to instill fear of war in Iranian
society, the newspaper said. The reformist daily Mardom Salari (February 25,
2017) also estimated that the American president is not expected to take
any military action against Iran because he is occupied with other
issues, including China and Russia, and that at any rate he does not have the
required legitimacy in his own country to declare war against Iran.
15. Notwithstanding the relatively cautious tone of the statements of
Supreme Leader Khamenei, senior political officials, and the Iranian media,
senior Iranian military officials adopted a harsher rhetoric toward the
US and warned the new administration not to dare act against Iran. Revolutionary
Guards Commander Mohammad-Ali Ja’fari declared in a ceremony on the
anniversary of the Islamic Revolution that the American administration must
recognize the uselessness of threats against Iran while the enemies of the
Islamic Revolution recognize its might. Ja’fari claimed that
even American commentators are aware of the risks entailed in a
confrontation with Iran and present to President Trump assessments that
Iran is treating the US as a “paper tiger” (Tasnim News, February 8, 2017).
Revolutionary Guards Deputy Commander Hossein Salami also warned the US
against using a military option against Iran, saying that the enemy knows that
opting for the military approach would turn its country into a “cemetery for the
aggressors” (Fars, February 20, 2017).
Public rhetoric vs. authentic Iranian concern
16. In spite of the public
rhetoric, which usually tried to belittle the risks posed to Iran by the new
American administration, the ITIC believes that as a matter of fact, the
Iranian regime does not completely rule out these possible risks. The main such
risks from the Iranian perspective:
A. Concern
about economic damage: The main Iranian concerns are centered in the
creation of a negative international atmosphere that would have
a negative effect on Western companies’ willingness to once again do business
with Iran. This may compromise Tehran’s efforts to improve its economic
situation following the nuclear agreement.
B. Iranian
concern of possible retaliatory measures by the US and the international
community in response to Iranian provocations.
C. Notwithstanding
the above, it seems that in the weeks that have passed since Trump took office,
there is an increasing conviction in Iran that President Trump does not
intend to cancel the nuclear agreement, especially in view of the
expected opposition to such a step by the other countries that have signed the
agreement.
|
Calls in Iranian media not to give President
Trump an excuse to take steps against Iran
17. The Iranian press, especially the
media affiliated with the pragmatic camp and the supporters of President
Rouhani, claimed that the US threats should be taken seriously.
Iranian commentators speculated that even if President Trump’s ability to take
steps against Iran is limited due to domestic and international opposition, it
would be a mistake to ignore his threats. This is especially true in light of
the inability to predict his behavior and given the fact that countries in the
international arena, led by Israel and Saudi Arabia, are making a major effort
to encourage the new administration in Washington to increase the pressure on
Iran. These commentators are calling on the government in Tehran to adopt a
cautious approach in view of the American threats and to avoid any action that
would provide the administration in Washington with an excuse to take action
against Iran.
18.An editorial published in the
reformist newspaper Ebtekar (February 5, 2017) warned that President
Trump and his national security adviser had designated Iran as a target
for their aggressive policies. The daily claimed that the US is in need
of excuses to justify its hostility toward Iran, and Tehran should
therefore be careful not to provide President Trump with the slightest excuse to
implement his “adventurous policy.” According to the daily, the Trump
administration’s strength against Iran lies in its ability to find a legitimate
ally for an operation against Iran, and Saudi Arabia and Israel are unable to
provide him with the necessary legitimacy to do so.
19. The Asr-e Iran website (February 4, 2017) also
called on the government in Tehran to adopt a cautious approach in light
of the US threats. The website warns that the domestic opposition to
President Trump is liable to increase his efforts to seek external threats and
initiate a war against Iran. The international community’s opposition to the US
president serves the interests of Iran, and Tehran must continue its diplomatic
efforts and avoid taking steps that would change the international atmosphere
against it. The adoption of extremist policies by Iran, claimed Asr-e
Iran, is precisely what Trump, “the Zionists,” and the Saudis want. If
the government continues to exercise political moderation in its foreign
relations and to improve its relations with other countries around the world,
the United States will not be able to mobilize an international coalition
against Iran even if it wants to. The website summed up the situation by
saying that the required response to Trump’s “insanity” is not insanity but
logic.
20 .Initial indications of Iran’s concern over
the US administration’s intentions and the public calls in the Iranian media to
adopt a cautious policy can also be found in Tehran’s practical
moves. In early February 2017, Western media reported that in view of
the threats against the United States, Tehran had withdrawn its
intention to carry out an additional test launch of a long-range
surface-to-surface missile. Instead, it launched a Mersad short-range
surface-to-air missile on February 8, 2017 (Fox News, February 8,
2017). However, it should be stressed that it is still too
early to assess whether Iran intends to change its overall policy in
relation to its missile program.
|
Iran’s diplomatic effort to recruit supporters and allies
21. With the election of US President Trump, Iran’s concern
over the establishment of a regional anti-Iranian coalition led by Saudi Arabia,
Iran, Turkey and Israel has increased. This concern intensified in
recent weeks in light of statements by senior Saudi, Turkish and Israeli
officials against Iran. During a recent visit to Bahrain, Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accused Iran of striving to disseminate
“Persian nationalism” in Syria and Iraq. At the same time, in a speech in the
Munich Security Conference, Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Mevlüt
Çavuşoğlu claimed that Iran is promoting Shiite separatism in the
region. At the same conference, Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs Adel
al-Jubeir accused Iran of being the main sponsor of terrorism in the
world and a destabilizing force in the Middle East. Israeli Defense
Minister Avigdor Lieberman said in his speech at the conference that
Iran wants to destabilize every country in the Middle East, and described the
Iranian Revolutionary Guards as the world’s biggest terrorist organization.
Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs Adel al-Jubeir’s visit to
Iraq on February 25, 2017, the first visit to Iraq by a Saudi foreign minister
since 2003, was perceived in Iran as another expression of Saudi Arabia’s
efforts to expand its regional influence and curb Iran’s influence.
22. Commentary in the Iranian press recently called on the government
in Tehran to strengthen its ties with Europe, Russia and China,
in order to counterbalance the pressure from the US, taking advantage of the
international opposition to President Trump’s policy. The newspaper
Mardom Salari called on the government to act urgently to strengthen
its ties with Europe, especially France, Germany, Britain and
Italy, to maintain good relations with China and Russia,
and to initiate the convening of conferences of the Islamic countries
with the aim of curbing anti-Iranian efforts of the United States. The
economic daily Donya-ye Eqtesad wrote that the international consensus
against Washington has created an opportunity for Iran to expand its ties with
Europe and East Asia, which improved in the wake of the nuclear agreement.
23. The Iranian effort to counterbalance the US pressure in the
international arena has found expression in statements made by Iranian
Vice President Eshaq Jahangiri. The Vice President announced Iran’s
plans to upgrade its economic relations with Russia during
President Rouhani’s visit to Moscow, which will take place in a few weeks.
According to Jahangiri, Iran is interested in expanding its economic
ties with the Euro-Asian Economic Union, whose members are Russia, Belarus,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia (Islamic Republic News Agency
(IRNA), February 21, 2017). In the regional arena, President
Rouhani visited Oman and Kuwait in mid-February 2017. The visit was made in
light of Iran’s growing recognition of the need to improve ties with the Gulf
States as part of the diplomatic solution to the regional risks.
President Rouhani’s opponents take advantage of the fear of the Trump administration
24. In view ofthe tension between Iran and the US, President
Rouhani’s hardline political opponents have increased their criticism of him,
claiming that the radicalization of the US stance is rooted in his erroneous
policy. In their efforts to attack the Iranian president shortly before
the presidential elections scheduled for May 2017, his adversaries have
reiterated that it was his policy of appeasement and his trust in the US
administration that led to escalation in the US policy toward
Tehran.
25. An article published in the radical daily Kayhan
(February 5, 2017) claimed that the recent steps by the US
administration against Iran, including the ban forbidding Muslims to enter the
United States and the sanctions against Iranian individuals and companies,
are a direct result of the nuclear agreement. These
developments indicate that the nuclear issue was only an excuse for the US
administration to present Iran as a threat and to exert pressure on it.
According to Kayhan, the steps taken by Trump stem from President
Rouhani’s weakness, the “smile politics” that he adopted toward the West, and
his continuing silence in view of the threats and demands made by the US during
the nuclear negotiations and after the signing of the nuclear
agreement. Had the government crossed the “red lines” defined by the
Supreme Leader and reacted aggressively to violations of the agreement by the
US, the Trump administration would not dare to treat Iran this way.
| 26. However, despite the harsh criticism of Rouhani, the hardliners in Iran also avoid explicit calling for a deliberate violation of the nuclear agreement on the part of Iran. It is evident that even President Rouhani’s harshest critics prefer that the US administration, rather than Iran, bear the responsibility for the possible collapse of the nuclear agreement, which they had reservations about from the outset. |
No comments:
Post a Comment