Germany leading tension between Iran, Europe

Hadi Mohammadi, Guest contributor

Hadi Mohammadi

While more than 45 days have elapsed since the eruption of the protests and riots in Iran, bids are still being made by some countries to fan the flames of a dying fire and keep it burning.

This comes as normally such issues are entirely domestic in nature and should be resolved between the people and their government, not through foreign interference by states failing to have a good record in similar areas.

What’s important with regard to the recent events is Europe’s substantial role in inciting the recent riots in Iran. Over the past weeks, some European states have provided overt and covert financial assistance to anti-Islamic Revolution lobbies and allowed them to attack Iran’s diplomatic missions on their soil. Imposition of sanctions against Iranian persons and institutions has been the most recent instance of such anti-Tehran measures. Among these European states, Germany seems to have played a more significant role in the implementation of hostile measures against Iran.

The German government’s role in the adoption of hostile measures and stances has become such bold that one can easily claim that it currently is the U.S. proxy in Europe and that of the international anti-Iran lobby for pressuring Tehran and leading the tension between the Islamic Republic and the EU.

Other than one or two exceptions, relations between Tehran and Berlin have traditionally been based on mutual respect and, at times, warm and cordial, with the latter serving as the former’s gateway to European markets and preparing the ground for its increased relations with Europe. Due to the same reason, the Zionists, a group of hardliners in the United States as well as elements of the anti-Iran lobby always sought to cause tensions in Tehran-Berlin ties, turning them against one another.

What’s currently taking place on the ground indicates that those opposed to favorable ties between Tehran and Berlin have apparently completely succeeded in souring the two sides’ relations. In addition, contributing to the policy of creating a rift in Tehran-Berlin relations have been factors such as bids to link Iran with Russia in the Ukraine conflict – despite Tehran’s official and explicit positions in opposition to war – and the appointment of new German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock.

As a matter of fact, despite the norm in the past years, Iran’s case has turned into a priority and an important issue in Germany’s internal policy. Tensions in the two sides’ bilateral ties have reached such a level in form and content never witnessed in their history of diplomatic relations, even in the aftermath of the Mykonos restaurant issue. The tensions in bilateral relations have become more conspicuous, in particular, following the end of Angela Merkel’s term as Chancellor and the coming to power of the new German government.

The Greens’ views and approaches, having turned by Baerbock into Germany’s dominant foreign policy, have caused the commonplace and shallow issues to greatly influence the German government’s emotional and shortsighted decision-making despite the age-old common interests of Tehran and Berlin. Through adopting such an approach, the party is capitalizing on the Ukraine war and human rights issues, which have recently turned into two important topics and priorities for the Europe’s public opinion, to proceed with its anti-Iran policy in the country and the continent.

Proof to the claim is the political and media sorcery that unfolded overnight in the form of presenting the OXI Courage Award of the U.S. Institute of Peace jointly to Masih Alinejad and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an effort to link the two issues.

Regrettably it appears that Germany has changed its behavior toward Iran based on emotion and irrationality, with the country’s foreign minister, having prioritized personal and partisan objectives and interests as the government’s top agenda, visibly turning a blind eye to the country’s long-term interests and acting against Iran. This comes as although damaging the two countries traditional age-old relations may be possible overnight, reconstructing such a ruin will definitely be a lengthy and exhausting process.

Based on the available evidence, this is the first time that an anti-Iran element belonging to a minority group, who fails to be popular even outside the country, has become a main source of decision-making in European states, such as France and Germany, against Tehran. Likewise, it is the very first time that anti-Islamic Republic Iranians living outside the country, such as Alinejad, have managed to pass themselves off as a source for Europe’s decision-making against Iran.

Iran has never been interested in the escalation of tensions in its relations with Europe and sees European countries as old partners and customers. Tehran has always sought to draw a distinguishing line between Europe and the United States and that is why it cannot understand the new approach adopted by some European states, particularly Germany, toward itself and seeks to change it.

It will be highly plausible if Europe, especially Germany, refrains from tying its interests to those of the United States and acting and deciding emotionally toward Iran based on the consultation provided by some treacherous elements who have turned their back on their nation’s interest.

Europeans know that they should not easily lose Iran, which is the main factor behind the Middle East’s stability and a place for resolving regional problems, to the whims of a foreign minister and her partisan demands and preferences. Iran and Europe are working together on a large number of cases, including the JCPOA, refugees’ issue and fighting terrorism as well as drug trafficking, the resolution of which is definitely in the both sides’ interests. Any escalation of tensions under flimsy pretexts fails to benefit either side, especially Europe.