This is a caption

این یک عنوان است.

This is a caption.
Mohammad Mohabbai

Without a doubt, the nuclear issue of Iran is one of the biggest challenges in Iran’s foreign policy throughout its history. It is a case that has often been intertwined with the fate of Iran’s national security and territorial integrity. The reason why this issue has become the top priority in Iran’s foreign policy and has reached such a level of importance is not the subject of this writing.

In the book “Political Economy of the Iranian Nuclear Dispute: A Study of the Clash of Civilizations” by Dr. Mohsen Renani, there is a key sentence that states that Iran’s economy is stuck in a political deadlock and politics is trapped in the nuclear dispute, which can be the cause of many of our political and economic problems. The book mentions that the opportunity for an agreement with the West is provided during the presidency of a Democrat in America, which is currently happening during the Obama administration. This book argues that the behavior of the West in the past 12 years in the Persian Gulf shows that it intends neither confrontation nor dialogue with civilizations, but rather it is in the interest of the West to end its own history and absolute dominance over the global system through the project of the clash of civilizations. The project of the clash of civilizations will be achieved when the West can release its dependence on fossil fuels and establish a new system based on clean and renewable energy to solve the issue of

Now, in the final days remaining until the deadline, we are at a nuclear agreement and the West and Iran are forced to make a crucial decision; a comprehensive agreement or a declaration of complete failure in negotiations.

The most important thing is the impact of the final success or failure of these negotiations on the domestic political situation in Iran. Issues such as political and civil freedoms and the domestic political climate in Iran. The major criticism that has been directed at Hassan Rouhani in the past two years is that he has not been as active in domestic politics as he has been in foreign policy, and some pessimists believe that he does not pay attention to the situation of civil institutions and freedoms within the country and is extremely indifferent towards the demands of a wide spectrum of the middle class, who have reached the presidency thanks to their votes. However, others believe that Hassan Rouhani, as soon as he is done with the nuclear negotiations, will pursue a path of reform in domestic politics and that is why he has placed so much importance on these negotiations. But what will be the state of political and civil freedoms in the two scenarios of success or failure of the negotiations?

First scenario: Successful negotiations.

Without any doubt, reaching an agreement with the six world powers, even if it does not lead to a quick removal of sanctions, is a vital and urgent necessity for Iran. From an internal perspective, Iran, due to the destruction of the country’s economy and the prevalence of extraordinary corruption and waste of resources – especially during the ninth and tenth governments – and the dissatisfaction close to social explosion, needs a peaceful shelter that can make people a little more hopeful and resilient towards the future.

First of all, it can be claimed that the human rights situation in Iran is much better compared to many regional countries that are considered allies of the West. However, this is not a reason to be satisfied with this situation. We Iranians should never compare ourselves to those countries that have a history of civility and prevalence of civilized thoughts, desire for rule of law, demands for citizenship rights, and important institutions such as parliament, media, parties, etc. In some cases, these institutions are even older than some European countries. Therefore, we should not be happy about the advancement of human rights in Iran compared to a country like Saudi Arabia. Of course, among some pessimistic human rights activists, an idea has emerged that the Islamic Republic, after reaching a nuclear agreement with the West, will become like Saudi Arabia or North Korea in dealing with internal issues and will easily crack down on opponents and critics. But this scenario is also unimaginable because neither the society of Iran nor the historical background of Iranians

But the fact that the human rights situation may improve with the achievement of a nuclear agreement is seriously doubted, as the executive branch in Iran is not actively addressing many human rights issues.

At the same time, experience has shown that whenever the Islamic Republic has increased its foreign relations with Western countries, unfortunately we have witnessed a sharp increase in suppression and elimination of opponents both inside and outside the country in a systematic manner. Let us remember the 1970s and the mass killings and political assassinations inside and outside Iran.

Human rights is a legal issue, not an abstract or philosophical one. The majority of experienced human rights activists believe that only by fundamentally changing the system of criminal, civil, and constitutional law (the relationship between people and government) and even current financial and commercial laws, can we witness the establishment of human rights and improvement of the status of citizens’ rights in Iran.

But without a doubt, in case of agreement, the ways of exchanging information and communications between Iran and the West will open up more and these communication channels will help reflect more issues and news related to Iran in the West. Therefore, naturally, the political atmosphere of Western society will be more conducive to hearing and taking action on human rights violations in Iran.

Second Scenario: Negotiation Failure

If these negotiations fail, it will lead to increased tensions with the world and the West, and will result in a more closed political space and worsen the human rights situation. In addition, the continuation and even intensification of sanctions will only exacerbate the situation. The collapse of the negotiations will undoubtedly strengthen members of Congress to impose even harsher sanctions against Iran.

One of these sanctions is the “Crude-Mandates” plan, which aims to bring Iran’s oil sales to zero and impose stricter restrictions on Iran’s access to the international financial system.

If negotiations are left without any agreement in June 2015, this situation will be a heavy political defeat for Hassan Rouhani. In the months following the end of negotiations, the economic conditions inside Iran will likely worsen, as positive expectations about the agreement will give way to fear of further sanctions and potential military conflict. These developments will weaken Rouhani even more and diminish his power and authority, while on the other hand, authoritarian and conservative institutions, as well as some military institutions, with the anticipation of more economic sanctions and potential military operations and sabotage by Israel and the United States, will play a more active role in domestic and foreign affairs and will add to the power of security institutions, which will inevitably harm the human rights and fundamental freedoms situation in Iran.

The failure of these negotiations, in addition to its destructive economic consequences in the region and the world, can lead to increased tensions in the region and easily spark larger conflicts. Conflict and tension are against stability and security, and in unstable and insecure conditions, talking about freedom and human rights is pointless.

Of course, another assumption must also be considered; perhaps if the negotiations fail and the integrity of the system is at risk, there is a possibility that governing institutions may come to the conclusion that in order to eliminate the danger, they must remove some restrictions and take a step towards attracting critics to the body of the system. Considering the authoritarian nature of non-democratic institutions in Iran, this possibility seems very weak, although we should not completely ignore it.

In general, in case of failure of atomic negotiations, the following consequences are imaginable:

a) The failure of negotiations, under the pretext of empty excuses, weakens the power and credibility of the country in critical times of the region and paves the way for the ambitious plans of several countries. They will rush towards achieving their remaining dreams of victory, the least of which is dragging military conflicts to the borders of our country and even to the internal border provinces.

B) The failure of negotiations at least closes the path of negotiations for a long time and opens the path to other options, and intensifying international sanctions replaces negotiations. In addition, it is enough for the Security Council to issue another resolution and with a hint and indication, make the path of military action smoother. In this case, an alliance with oil dollars will definitely be formed and by adhering to the decision of the Security Council, they will attempt to use military force.

C) Internal differences and tensions are intensifying. Supporters of the failed negotiations, who have seen their arguments victorious, will assert their dominance and will use both soft and hard power to silence their opponents. Unrest is to be expected. Real and virtual spaces will be closed.

D) The failure of negotiations will convey a message and signal that there is a dual authority in Iran. It will become clear that those in power, elected by the people (the executive branch), lack the necessary ability and capability to implement the will of the majority of voters.

And finally, it will cause disappointment and frustration for a large portion of the people. Those who voted for someone on 13 June 2013 with the promise of solving the nuclear issue will come to the conclusion that the ballot box is not effective…

Final words

Overall, it must be said that the situation of human rights and political and civil freedoms in Iran is a topic that goes beyond a diplomatic issue and encompasses a wide range of fundamental problems in the fields of jurisprudence, law, legislation, and politics. The success of negotiations can only slightly improve the human rights situation, especially in terms of information dissemination, and fundamental reforms in this regard are not very conceivable in the event of a nuclear agreement. This means that, based on previous experiences, the nuclear agreement opens the door for interaction with the world and allows human rights news in Iran to reach the ears of the international community sooner and better. However, the root problems will not be solved with this agreement or any other agreement. It requires a strong determination among government elites to fundamentally reform these issues. Considering that this desire for reform is not seen, there is no hope for it.

In case of failure in negotiations, without a doubt, the situation of freedom and human rights in Iran will worsen, but this worsening will not be significantly different from the current situation, as the current situation has less potential and capability for worsening.

It seems that there will be no significant difference between the improvement of human rights situation in Iran in case of a nuclear agreement and the worsening of this situation in case of failed negotiations; because the issue of human rights in Iran is much more fundamental than these discussions.