In the meantime, one of the highlights of the Russian president's visit was the words of Iranian Supreme Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei to Putin about timely taking of the initiative in the Ukraine crisis.
"If Russia had not taken the initiative in Ukraine, the other side would have caused a war with its own initiative," he said.
However, these words of the Leader were interpreted by biased foreign media and American officials as Iran's official support for Russia's special military operation in Ukraine, questioning Tehran's initial and official position on neutrality in this war. Fabrication of the story of Iranian drone exports to Russia also has the same aim.
Naturally, the positions of governments regarding the events and developments of the international system, especially wars with wide regional and international dimensions, can change over time due to various factors, and this is a common and accepted principle in the international relations, which has many historical examples including change of position of the American government in World War II, which left the position of neutrality after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941 and joined the Allies. But can we interpret the Leader's remarks an official support to Russia and exit from neutrality as the Americans and their media promote?
First, Iran's position regarding the war in Ukraine is still neutrality and support for a solution without intervention of the NATO. Therefore, until the official position of the Iranian government changes, talking about Iran's support for Russia in the Ukraine war because of the close and growing relations between Tehran and Moscow is baseless and utter political rhetoric.
Second, no contradictions can be found between the Leader's remarks on the roots of Ukraine war and the Islamic Republic's policy and his words at the meeting with Putin.
In his first stance on Ukraine conflict, the Leader said in early March that "Ukraine is a victim of America's policy."
In a televised address, he pointed out that Iran wants the war in Ukraine to stop, adding: "We are against war anywhere in the world. We are against the killing of people and the destruction of infrastructure…. The root of the crisis in Ukraine is American policy. America brought Ukraine to this point."
Now a comparison between the Leader's new and earlier stances makes clear the principal approach of Iran on Ukraine war which recognizes the Ukrainian war as a result of Western warmongering and the unavoidable situation caused to Russia to defend its vital security interests in the face of NATO's eastward expansion.
That the Iranian leader in his analysis of Ukraine crisis with envisage and foresight talked about the final goal of the West behind NATO expansion and intervention in Ukraine conditions, which is starting a war against Russia under the excuse of retaking Crimea Peninsula, does mean he backed Moscow but means that he wants to suggest that the West bears the main responsibility for Ukraine crisis not Russia. It should not be forgotten that in at least the last two years, Moscow held several rounds of negotiations with Kiev and even with the Western sides to prevent war and get security guarantees about the non-expansion of NATO towards its borders. But the Kremlin's efforts all met closed doors and Putin concluded that Western countries basically do not plan to entertain Russia's security red lines.
The Leader's stance is, indeed, seen in views of the international affairs experts. The prominent American researcher and lecturer John Mearsheimer who is famous for his realistic approach decided that Washington is the main party to blame for Ukraine crisis. In a seminar held in Florence, Italy in June, Mearsheimer said: "My key point is that the United States pursued policies in Ukraine taken by Putin and his colleagues as an existential threat to their country. I specifically talk about the US obsession with taking Ukraine into the NATO and turning it into a Western bastion on Russian borders."
No comments:
Post a Comment