• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
21.02.2011

IRAN AND POLITICAL CRISIS IN EGYPT

   

Sevak Sarukhanyan

The events which took place in Tunisia and especially in Egypt are significant for Iran. This may seriously change political situation and developments in Arab world, thus either endangering or strengthening regional and international positions of Iran.

After the protest actions in Egypt turned into the anti-governmental manifestations, official Tehran expressed support for the Egyptian opposition. Iran’s president, spiritual leader and other political figures encouraged Egyptians to overthrow H. Mubarak’s authorities, which was blamed by Tehran in carrying out pro-Israeli and pro-American policy and being anti-Muslim. The main sense of the address of the spiritual leader A. Khamenei made on February 4 was that all that happened in Egypt took place by the will of God and it was based on Islam and moral; its main goal was to get rid of the current authorities for the sake of the Islamic revival. On the same day the former head of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution R. Safavi stated that Egyptian revolution was a natural continuation of the Iranian Islamic revolution and Iran was ready to support it.

Despite the warm reaction of the Iranian party, Egyptian powers did not welcome Tehran’s activity. On February 7 on IkhwanWeb site which belongs to “Muslim Brothers” the response of the organization to Ali Khamenei was posted; it was mentioned that Egyptian revolution was not an Islamic one, but it was a revolution of the Muslims, Christians and people of other religions in the name of freedom. This answer is remarkable not for the fact that it characterizes the direction of the revolutionary wave and its non-Islamic essence, but for the fact that Tehran has no serious partner in today’s Egypt who would protect Iranian interests.

Change of power in Egypt may become the most important development in the Arab world for Iran after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. After the Islamic revolution Tehran has never had normal or good relations with Cairo. Egypt is the important ally of the US in the Middle East, one of the indirect palladiums of Israel’s secure existence and Mubarak was the most successful Arab secular leader until recently, during whose rule Egypt avoided wars, proved stable economic growth and became one of the world’s tourist and cultural centers. Though Mubarak’s authorities have always been corrupted and authoritarian, nevertheless, it managed to avoid domestic disturbances and to balance American, Soviet-Russian, Arab, European and, over the recent period, Chinese interests. With all these features and successful anti-Islamic policy Egypt had been the antipode of Iran in the geo-ideological sense. Since 1979 Iran has chosen the other way, which cornerstone was to take the position of the leader in the Muslim world at the expense of confrontation with the superpowers and to strengthen its positions through the direct or indirect participation in regional confrontations.

Against this background, resignation of Mubarak played into Iran’s hand from ideological and moral points of view, as in the result of it one of the symbols of successful secular government was overthrown.

But the developments in Egypt may have definite regional meaning for Tehran.

New zone of instability

It is obvious that the resignation of Mubarak initiated instability in the region which will be promoted by three main factors:

  • If after Mubarak his follower Omar Suleimani who is acceptable for the West comes to power, it will be hard to stabilize situation in the country because his authority among people is not high.
  • Legal Egyptian opposition is still in the stage of formation while “Muslim Brothers” are just entering official and legitimate oppositional field. It is not clear yet, to what the process of crystallization of opposition will bring and how it will affect stability in Egypt.
  • Liberalization of the domestic political life in Egypt and usage of the democratic mechanisms will afford an opportunity to Islamic world and other external powers to be involved in domestic processes in Egypt which was almost impossible under Mubarak’s rule.

Those circumstances will not allow Egypt to overcome political crisis in short or medium term just like in case with Iran after the Islamic revolution in 1979. In 1979-1982 Iran which suffered from terrorist acts and bloody political struggle was in decline which could have lasted for quite a long time but for the authorities which taking advantage of Iranian-Iraqi war had not suppressed processes which corrupted state. Such a scenario can hardly be used for Egypt and this will turn this biggest Arab country in a new center of regional conflicts. Such a prospect is more than advantageous for Iran because main anti-Iranian powers – Israel and United States – instead of actions directed to the suspension of creation of the nuclear weapon in Iran, including the probability of a military strike on Iran, will concentrate on the process of the Egyptian settlement.

From this point of view, one can expect that Iran will use its whole potential to prolong such a settlement, just like the way Iran acts in Iraq. It should also be mentioned that political crisis in Egypt, unlike the one in Iraq, constitute no serious danger for Iran and the “domino effect” caused by the Egyptian instability can hardly reach Iran.

“Domino Effect”

From the point of view of “domino effect”, for Iran the possible transition of the “Islamic” and “people revolutions” to the countries of the Near East and the Gulf is important. Such prospects, including Islamization of the region are not advantageous for Iran. Anti-governmental Islamist movements in the region are strong in Syria – the strategic partner of Iran, where the radical Sunnite Islamist powers are connected with “Al-Qaida” and their goal is to overthrow current Syrian secular authorities. Such a prospect is undesirable for Iran because as a result Iran will lose its important partner and ally, and instead, it will have extremely anti-Iranian and anti-Shiite government in Syria. “Islamic revival” in other Arab countries is also undesirable for Iran. It so happened that most of the Arabic organizations supporting “Islamic revival” has anti-Iranian and anti-Shiite moods.

In fact, the following factors are advantageous for Iran:

a. Further destabilization of Egypt;

b. Keeping the crisis exclusively on the territory of Egypt.

Strange as it may seem but in the second item Iran’s interests coincide with the ones of Israel and the United States, which will try to make the crisis more controllable and not to allow its spreading over the Arabic world, in case if it is impossible to overcome the crisis.

Aggravation of the Iranian-Azerbaijani relations

Right after the beginning of anti-governmental movements in Tunisia and Egypt, anti-Iranian campaign was initiated in Azerbaijan which later has turned into real hysteria. Taking into consideration the fact that almost all the state mass media took part in this campaign, one can come to the conclusion that those actions are managed by the state. The main fact which is used in the anti-Iranian propaganda is the Armenian-Iranian cooperation and the second or the third is that Tehran interferes in Azerbaijani domestic affairs and supports different organizations in Azerbaijan.

Most probably, “Islamic revival” in Northern Africa caused serious concern in Azerbaijan. In this aspect a campaign against religious organizations connected with Iran can be expected in Azerbaijan in the months to come, which may become a serious destabilizing impulse for the Azerbaijani social and political life, and at the same time it may deteriorate the relations between Tehran and Baku.


Return
Another materials of author