Fyodor Lukyanov: "Opportunities based solely on the lack of a partner's choice are very infirm"

Interview by Vestnik Kavkaza Editor-in-Chief Maria Sidelnikova

Geneva will host a new round of talks between Iran and the six mediators of the nuclear program today. Experts say that the main obstacle in the negotiating process is the American-Iranian confrontation. Fyodor Lukyanov, a political analyst, the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, has described the prospects of the nuclear negotiations and the role of the U.S. and Israel in the Middle East.

- What fate do you think Israel has in the context of alienation of the U.S.?

- It may happen in a decade or even sooner that Israel will be the only factor preventing the U.S. from neglecting the Middle East and distancing itself from it. Because if the tendency for energy self-sufficiency of the U.S. continues, the question arises as to why they would engage in the issue, especially considering all the brutal cruelty and mercilessness of Islamic State, they do not plan to establish a caliphate in America. Their goal is to drive the Americans out of the territory they call their own. If expenses keep rising without any vital need to stay there for oil and gas, the U.S. would wonder whether the game is worth the candle. Why not leave problems to someone more concerned with them?

Israel is probably the only state that can prevent them from doing this. The growing estrangement between Israel and the U.S. is more of a conjuncture nature. The Israeli government is just on very bad terms particularly with the current American administration. But the administration will be gone soon. The Israeli lobby still remains, and the ideological support is not only associated with the Jews living in the U.S.

One of the main pillars is Orthodox Protestants, Israel for them is not a Jewish state, it is the Holy Land. They think that this is the reason why it should never be left without protection. This is what George Bush was mostly relying on in his policies, including his Middle Eastern one.

It is too early to bury American-Israeli ties. On the other hand, with such a dynamic in the region, Israel may face its worst ordeals in the next decades. Because it risks ending up surrounded by absolutely hostile countries striving for its destruction. Israel is certainly many times stronger than everyone else. It has nuclear weapons, but when you deal with a fanatical ideology, it may be useless. How well the Israeli authorities understand it is a different issue. But if they realize it, we will see absolutely unexpected new configurations.

- For example?

- So far, the interests of Israel and Saudi Arabia, for example, objectively coincide. Or a situation may appear when it is suddenly revealed that the existing ties of Israel and Iran are needed. It is hard to imagine now. But on the other hand, we could not imagine a lot 10-15-20 years ago. Israel needs to reframe itself and its policy in the region, and understand what it wants to be. A national Jewish state is one case. But if it's a civil nation including everyone, which is hard to envision today, then it is a completely different case. Israel is a democratic state. And who knows if the population suddenly takes a shift to the left, as has happened before, a new wave of attempts at a settlement may follow.

- What about Iran? Can we say that the sanctions against it have practically been lifted?

- I would not be hasty with the opinion that there will be no sanctions. The problem at the moment is not about the state of the Iranian nuclear program, it is about the ability of the U.S. administration to comply with agreements, should they be made. Obama and Rouhani have put a big bet on the agreements while negotiating. At the same time, the majority of the political class in the U.S. considers it pointless, and that Iran has been and will be the enemy of the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia. And Iran has a supreme authority that gives the decisive, final word. It allowed negotiations to take place, following the "Us, let's give it a try!" approach. He himself does not actually trust the Americans. He believes that no agreements can be made with them, because they will cheat anyway.

But the sanctions have had an impact of course. The population of Iran is not happy to suffer heroic anguishes for the sake of national pride. Iran will hardly go for concessions to make some agreement, they will not do it. And the U.S. is not necessarily ready, even if such concessions happen to be made, to accept and realize them. Because the very convincing theoretical discussions, proving that America needs Iran today, crash in an environment where Iran is treated extremely negatively. In the context of a Congress overly hostile towards Obama, it is even more complicated.

Iran is undeniably interested in restoring relations with America, we cannot condemn or criticize Tehran for that. It is a natural will to escape isolation. But the very widespread fears that they can reach an agreement now and the. special relations between Moscow and Tehran will end are very exaggerated, I think. Iran has a very specific psychology, combining religious identity and very explicit superpower nationalism.

I do not know whether the sanctions problem has been resolved. The "just a little" may continue for a very long time. Even if the issue is resolved, Russia should not try to torpedo the process, because Iran itself wants to achieve the goal. If we start to drag out the process for personal gains, because it is better for us to keep Iran in isolation and ourselves as a priviledged partner, it will sooner or later end with the disappointment of Iran and its reorientation, if not a break up.

We cannot bet on a model disadvantageous for the other side. Of course, if Iran escapes sanctions, the space will become narrower for Russia. To be more precise, the ranges of choices will expand for Iran. But Iran sticks to the idea of maneuvering and balance, Russia is no less important for it even then. To prevent an image of a turn, Iran will be interested in demonstrating ties with Russia, the SCO even more... In the end, Russia will have fewer opportunities, but the opportunities will be more real. Because opportunities based solely on the lack of a partner's choice are very infirm.

- So, you mean that the United States does not plan to put pressure on Iran to the end?

- I suppose that the formulation "to put pressure to the end/not to put pressure to the end" is not very usable. If it comes to sole pressure to the end, the result will be the reverse. At such a moment, Iran would only become infuriated, action provokes counter-reaction.

I think that the U.S. needs to take a more flexible position. Can it do it? I am not sure. But the fact that it needs Iran now is indisputable. Overall, the situation in the region is deplorable for the U.S., and changing the quality of relations with Iran is, we can say, the last trick in Obama's sleeve, he is putting a big bet on it. That is why such efforts are being made. The U.S. diplomacy has never put so much effort into anything as much as into the negotiations. They have no real bargain discussed. The Americans forgot how to do it. They got used to forcing others to accept their conditions or nothing happens at all. Because it is an important precedent for the U.S. if everything fails, they will blame the stubborn, aggressive Iranian regime that one cannot make deals with. In reality, it will greatly demonstrate that America has lost its once splendid diplomatic talents.

What had to be done with Iran is comparable with what President Nixon did with China. Evaluating interests, he figured that relations with China needed to be settled to strengthen positions against the Soviet Union. So, in order to avoid having two huge communist opponents and have one instead, the other one should at least be neutral for your convenience. Using Henry Kissinger's talent, it was done. The revolutionary turn helped it a lot, if not guarantee victory in the Cold War to a great extent. In the light of its scale and significance, something else should be done. The problem is that neither Nixon nor Kissinger are available now.