Dieser Internet-Auftritt kann nach dem Tod des Webmasters, Peter Strutynski, bis auf Weiteres nicht aktualisiert werden. Er steht jedoch weiterhin als Archiv mit Beiträgen aus den Jahren 1996 – 2015 zur Verfügung.

"Während die USA Poker in der Region gespielt haben, hat der Iran Schach gespielt." / 'While the US has been playing poker in the region, Iran has been playing chess.'

Das Londoner Institut Chatham House veröffentlicht eine interessante Studie: Iran, its Neighbours and the Regional Crises

Der Einfluss des Iran im Nahen Osten ist nach Ansicht britischer Experten durch Washingtons so genannten Krieg gegen den Terrorismus gestärkt worden. Mit den Taliban in Afghanistan und dem Saddam-Hussein-Regime im Irak hätten die USA zwei der wichtigsten regionalen Rivalen des Iran eliminiert. So heißt es in einer am 23. Aug. veröffentlichten Studie des unabhängigen politischen Forschungszentrums Chatham House in London.
Wir dokumentieren im Folgenden eine Pressemitteilung des Instituts, die eine Kurzfassung der wichtigsten Ergebnisse der Studie enthält (englisch). Die Fundstelle der Studie selbst wird am Ende des Textes mitgeteilt. Im Kasten außerdem noch die Zusammenfassung ("Executive Summary") der Studie durch deren Herausgeber, Robert Lowe and Claire Spencer.



In der Studie heißt es weiter, weder die 2001 vertriebenen Taliban in Afghanistan, noch die 2003 gestürzte Diktatur im Irak seien "durch kohärente und stabile politische Strukturen" ersetzt worden. Im Gegenteil: Der Irak scheint mittlerweile gar nicht mehr von den Besatzungsmächten kontrollierbar zu sein und in Afghanistan erstarken wieder die Kräfte, die vor fünf Jahren militärisch geschlagen orden sind. Die Instabilität im Nahen Osten, von der letztlich der Iran profitiere, sei durch die jüngsten Konflikte zwischen Israel und der Hisbollah im Libanon sowie zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern im Gazastreifen nur noch verstärkt worden.

Ungeachtet aller Bemühungen der USA, dem Iran entgegenzutreten, habe Teheran "erfolgreich seine Beziehungen mit den Nachbarn kultiviert, sogar mit jenen arabischen und und sunnitischen Staaten, die seinen Einfluss fürchten". Der Iran sehe sich inzwischen in einer "Position beachtlicher Stärke". Im Irak, den Teheran längst als "seinen eigenen Vorgarten" ansehe, habe "der Iran inzwischen die USA als einflussreichste Macht abgelöst, was ihm eine Schlüsselrolle für die Zukunft des Irak verschafft". Der Unterschied in der Politik des Iran und der USA wird in einem schönen Bild verdeutlicht: "Während die USA Poker in der Region gespielt haben, hat der Iran Schach gespielt. Der Iran spielt ein längeres und klügeres Spiel und ist weitaus erfolgreicher , wenn es um den Gewinn der Herzen und Köpfe der Menschen geht." Zudem sei Teheran im Atomstreit mit dem Westen mittlerweile davon überzeugt, dass es sich durchsetzen werde.

Besonders interessant ist auch die Analyse der inneren Situation im Iran. Die Autoren der Studie vertreten die Auffassung, dass die Position des iranischen Präsidenten im Machtgefüge der herrschenden Eliten längst nicht so unangefochten ist wie häufig angenommen wird. Das bezieht sich sowohl auf die Innenpolitik als auch auf die Außenpolitik. Unverkennbar seien vor allem die politischen Widersprüche zwischen Ayatollah Khamenei und Ahmadinedschad. Der Westen sei aber einfach nicht in der Lage, die großen Chancen zu erkennen, die bei einem richtigen Umgang mit der islamischen Welt vorhanden wären. Zwischen "links liegen lassen" und militärischen Aktionen gibt es nämlich ein weites Feld von Gelegenheiten, die genutzt werden sollten.

Kenntnisreich geschrieben (von einem Stab aus 18 Wissenschaftlern) sind auch die zahlreichen spezifischen Länderstudien. Neben dem Iran werden untersucht Irak, Syrien, Libanon, Israel, Jordanien, Ägypten, die Staaten des Golf-Kooperationsrats, Türkei, Russland und die Staaten der ehemaligen Sowjetunion, Afghanistan, Pakistan,Indien, China und Japan.

Zusammenfassung: Pst


Press Release

Iran’s regional position is key to its strength

Wednesday 23 August 2006

Key messages:
  • The 'war on terror' removed the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, Iran's two greatest regional rivals, and strengthened Iran’s regional leverage in doing so;
  • Israel's failure to defeat Hizbullah has reinforced Iran's position as the region's focal point against US-led policy;
  • If seriously threatened, Iran has the potential to inflame the region yet further;
  • A US-sponsored military strike would be devastating for Iran, the Persian Gulf region and beyond
Iran's influence in Iraq has superseded that of the US, and it is increasingly rivalling the US as the main actor at the crossroads between the Middle East and Asia. Its role within other war- torn areas such as Afghanistan and southern Lebanon has now increased hugely. This is compounded by the failure of the US and its allies to appreciate the extent of Iran’s regional relationships and standing - a dynamic which is the key to understanding Iran’s newly found confidence and belligerence towards the West. As a result, the US-driven agenda for confronting Iran is severely compromised by the confident ease with which Iran sits in its region. This is the key finding of Iran, its Neighbours and the Regional Crises, a major new report published by Chatham House.

The report also looks into the ideology of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and unpicks Iran’s complicated power structure. It claims that despite his popularity, Ahmadinejad neither holds an insurmountable position within Iran nor commands universal support for his outspoken foreign policy positions. The paper outlines the friction between Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, with the former increasingly trying to wrest control of foreign policy away from the extreme positions of Ahmadinejad and his hardline supporters.

On hostility with the US, the report argues that while the US may have the upper hand in ‘hard’ power projection, Iran has proved far more effective through its use of ‘soft' power. According to the report, the Bush administration has shown little ability to use politics and culture to pursue its strategic interests while Iran’s knowledge of the region, its fluency in the languages and culture, strong historical ties and administrative skills have given it a strong advantage over the West. The report also holds a cautious view of the Iran-Israel relationship. It outlines four future scenarios for the relationship between the two states, one of which is the creation of a ‘cold-war’ style nuclear stand-off should Iran achieve nuclear capability.

Dr Claire Spencer, Head, Middle East Programme said 'Iran's intricate relationships with other states in the region, as well as a number of sub-state actors within these countries, have put it in a remarkably flexible position from which to defend its interests'

Dr Ali Ansari, Associate Fellow, Middle East Programme, said: 'Western policy towards the Middle East shows a complete lack of imagination. There is a world of opportunities between neglect and military action which has yet to be fully explored.'

Nadim Shehadi, Associate Fellow, Middle East Programme, said: 'While the US has been playing poker in the region, Iran has been playing chess. Iran is playing a longer, more clever game and has been far more successful at winning hearts and minds.'

In the widest-ranging report of its kind, Iran’s position in relation to all of the players in the Middle East and Asian regions is analyzed, with sections on Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, the GCC states, Turkey, Russia and the former Soviet states, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, China and Japan.

Source: www.chathamhouse.org.uk

NOTES FOR EDITORS:
"Iran, its Neighbours and the Regional Crises" is published by Chatham House and draws on the expertise of eighteen of its experts. The report is available to download from this website free of charge:
www.chathamhouse.org.uk (pdf-file)

Executive Summary

The Middle East is bedevilled by crises. The war between Hizbullah and Israel, the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, the instability in Iraq and the dispute over Iran’s nuclear programme create a climate of deep unease. Iran is involved in all these crises, to a greater or lesser degree, and its regional role is significant and growing.

In applying pressure on Iran to cease support for Hizbullah, to refrain from hostility towards Israel, to resist meddling in Iraq and to abandon any thoughts of nuclear military capability, the United States hopes for the cooperation of Iran’s regional neighbours. However, Iran has successfully cultivated relations with its neighbours, even those Arab and Sunni states which fear its influence, and is in a position of considerable strength.

Iran is simply too important – for political, economic, cultural, religious and military reasons – to be treated lightly by any state in the Middle East or indeed Asia. The wars and continued weaknesses in Afghanistan and Iraq have further strengthened Iran, their most powerful immediate neighbour, which maintains significant involvement in its ‘near-abroad’. The US-driven agenda for confronting Iran is severely compromised by the confident ease with which Iran sits in its region.

Iran’s pursuit of nuclear technology has recently dominated its relations with the Western powers, but not those with its regional neighbours. Understanding the dynamics of Iran’s relations with its neighbours helps explain why Iran feels able to resist Western pressure. While the US and Europeans slowly grind the nuclear issue through the mills of the IAEA and UN Security Council, Iran continues to prevaricate, feeling confident of victory as conditions turn ever more in its favour.

Iran’s domestic power structure is complex and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is only one of a number of players. His dramatic millenarian rhetoric attracts headlines, but the broader governing polity does share his robust conviction that Iran is the linchpin of a wide region and can maintain firm independent positions.

Iran views Iraq as its own backyard and has now superseded the US as the most influential power there; this affords it a key role in Iraq’s future. Iran is also a prominent presence in its other war-torn neighbour with close social ties, Afghanistan. The Sunni Arab states of Jordan, Egypt and the Gulf are wary of Iran yet feel compelled by its strength to maintain largely cordial relations while Iran embarrasses their Western-leaning governments through its stance against the US.

Syria and Iran enjoy an especially close relationship, as most clearly seen in their alliance against the US and Israel, and support for Hizbullah. Iran’s relationship with Lebanon is long and intricate and the conflict between Israel and Hizbullah in July-August 2006 may be partly seen in the context of the broader struggle between Iran and the US/Israel. Israel certainly views Iran as its greatest threat and the tension between the two has increased.

The relationship between Iran and Turkey pivots between friendship and rivalry but Turkey favours good relations and the avoidance of further regional instability. Russia is a significant economic partner to Iran, is heavily involved in its nuclear programme, and tends to take the role of mediator at the international level.

The recent rapprochement between Iran and Pakistan remains ambiguous while Iran and India have notably improved ties, mostly on the basis of Indian energy needs. Energy security and economic ties also dominate Iran’s relations with China and Japan.




Zurück zur Iran-Seite

Zur Nahost-Seite

Zurück zur Homepage