• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
26.12.2007

NEW GEOPOLITICAL REALITIES

   

Gagik Ter-Harutyunyan

From the standpoint of geopolitical developments the year of 2007 has been quite a steady one. The discussions on formation of multipolar system prevailing in the analytical community in the past were transformed from the theoretical surface to the real policy. One may state as a fact that the transitional stage of being transform from the unipolar into the multipolar lasted much less than it had been predicted. At the same time one could witness some new tendencies, which have come to prove (although indirectly) that the political formats of the newly drown multipolar world may differ from the ideas about it.

The main showing of the formation of the multipolar world is the withdrawal of the United States from its global monopolistic positions. That process is conditioned both by the strengthening of other geopolitical actors and partial degradation of ideological, political and economic systems of the US and it allies (mainly Great Britain and Israel). Today these processes are obvious for many, and in this context, the most remarkable thing should probably be considered the reconsideration and reinterpretation of the US strategy to Iran. The signs of suchlike approach were quite many in 2007: it should only be mentioned the US-Iran negotiations in Baghdad. However, it was announced as an official conception in the publication of the most authoritative structure of the US intelligence community, National Intelligence Council (NIC), that Iran had sopped its nuclear weapon program still in 2003 and is not going to realize it in the near future. This is certain to be the expression of clear political order. One should only remember the reports of the US special services on the existence of WMD in Iran weakened by blockades and sanctions in 2001-2003 which made a basis for the United States to organize a military intrusion. It is obvious that today the NIC released data make a basis to give up the well known intention of launching military operations against Iran, at least in the near future.

It should also be mentioned that the relations with Iran are one if the cornerstones of American strategy, as for the last thirty years the contradictions of the two countries include the whole field of ideological, political and economic relations. A considerable part of the analytical community did not doubt that the US-Iran military conflict was inevitable: the main discords were relating to the terms of the conflict to be unfolded and its possible scenarios. Basing on quite contradicting information released by the mass media, one may suppose that the reinterpretation of the US strategy to Iran was not that easy for the ruling US administration. It considerably reflects the changes expected to be made as a result of presidential elections 2008 and the Israeli lobbing in this connection. There is an impression that Israel, closely related with the US in political and economic fields, today considers it impossible any possible power developments in the region. The considerably peaceful position of Israel, in comparison with the past, has come to prove it, and it was expressed in Israeli-Palestinian conference held in Annapolis (USA). Let’s also mention that the US political retreat dictates its allies to act more independently, which we can witness especially in the positions of Turkey and Israel.

In any case, it should be stated as a fact once more that the NIC reports, which have been made public, logically stated that the US global policy was stepping into a new stage where the main stress would be put on so called “soft powers” instead of the military ones. At the same time, it is obvious that declining global monopoly, the United States continues to remain “the first among the equals” according to the well known Middle Age formula. Having huge mental and material resources, the US still remains the only state which is able to draw up the structure of the multipolar world maximum corresponding to its political elite’s ideas about national interests. In this sense, it is not excluded that the approach to come to common terms with Iran may pursue the following strategic programs.

As it is known geopolitical realities are quite steady realities and the projects connected with it have a long life. Today as well, like half a century ago, the main competitors of Anglo-Saxon supremacy, after the well known transformations, still remain Russia and China. In this sense, it is probably worth mentioning CENTO (this geopolitical alliance is better known by the name “Baghdad Pact”) formed in 1955, where Grate Britain took under its umbrella Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan. In the future the military committee of that alliance also included the British Empire’s assignee – the United States. At the period of the first Cold War SENTO aimed at blocking the possible expansion of “Soviets” from the South. Today, the realities are certainly different; however the political logic continues to remain the same after certain evolutions. In that context the US aspirations to ease the US-Iran, and in some sense the US –Turkey contradictions are maybe directed to the formation of a new kind of CENTO (probably with a more pretentious and obliging name). Such an axis, where will certainly be involved Afghanistan, will considerably contradict the influence of the strengthening Russia and China and will assure the Anglo-Saxon worthy presence in the multipolar world. One shouldn’t also exclude that that axis will be formed as the center of the Islamic world’s some powers in the new world-order.

The possibility of the above mentioned developments are directly witnessed by the new tendencies obvious in China’s (the conceptional and systemized position of the latter’s foreign policy yield to the American one) strategy. According to the mass media, that state “shows some signs” that possibly it will not be against the UN imposed possible sanctions in connection with the Iran nuclear program. Such an approach has been also proved by the fact that China creates some complexities in expending loans to Iran. That’s to say, that new power state feels some dangers from the strengthening Iran which will possibly have chances to cooperate with the US.

Perhaps, Russia’s double standard behavior to Iran may be observed in the framework of the same logic.


Return
Another materials of author