Ahmed Moustafa writes
The United States always mentions privately and in public what is constant in its strategies for international relations that it has a number of enemies whose power must be limited – the trio (Chinese, Russian, and Iranian) come on top of the enemies of the American regime, given the existing alliance between these countries for several decades.
Especially the period when former Iranian President and the Professor of Philosophy, Mr. Muhammad Khatami, came to the presidency and presented his global initiative (dialogue between religions and civilizations, which were adopted by the United Nations and the Vatican respectively) in response to the extremist American ideas of both Huntington and Fukuyama, the students of (Strauss), which embodied in books such as (the Clash of Civilizations and the End of History).
These ideas, which showed not only Iran, but the South and the new powers such as Russia and China, Iran’s neighbors, were at a decent and respectable level in front of the world, and it was at that time the beginning of Russian-Iranian cooperation with the conclusion of the first partnership agreement for twenty years that included work in the field of establishing and developing nuclear plants for peaceful use, as well as developing fields of oil and gas inside Iran and military cooperation.
Likewise, the Iranian-Chinese, through infrastructure projects and Iran’s supply of oil to the Chinese side, then increased cooperation between those three countries in several security and strategic aspects, especially the war on terrorism and cooperation in some regional issues linking them with the Arab world in files such as the Iraqi, Syrian, Yemeni and Libyan file.
The period of the existence of US President Obama was a prosperous period in the US in the field of international relations, as it was the period in which, after an argument that lasted for about 15 years with the Iranian side, the 5 + 1 nuclear agreement was reached, which at that time limited the nuclear weapons race, limiting it only to peaceful use, whereas both of (China and Russia) were the guarantors of this agreement.
Not only that, the relations with both the Chinese and Russian sides were to a certain extent balanced and stable – Obama proposed an initiative to teach a million Americans the Chinese language, in order to contain China because he realized that it had become realistically the first economic power, because the trade balance between the two countries was reaching more than 400 billion dollars annually, in favor of China at a rate of 9/1.
However, the arrival of the extremist hawks to the presidency in America (Trump and his team) tried to break this alliance, and even disavow the agreement secured by the United Nations with Iran, on the basis that this trio are the enemies of America, as mentioned above, and even tried to impose the Snapback mechanism recently on Iran, but he failed, through the Security Council, to bring it back to before the nuclear agreement – on the basis that he would be re-elected again to the presidency. As well as the recent sanctions that reached some top-level figures and organizations, plus extra tariffs on Sino imports to the USA. In addition to the US embargo on semiconductors imported by the Chinese side.
This is what prompted the three countries to work on (worse prospects) and to renew strategic agreements, not only that, but also make it effective for a period of 20 years, renewable between Iran on the one hand, and China and Russia on the other hand, so Iran was able to renew its strategic partnership with the Russian side, especially after several repeated visits by the Iranian foreign minister to Moscow.
II. Methodological Strategy to carry out this extendable research:-
Bearing in mind that our “research question” is: Will New Powers carry out stability in Eurasia Region and the world?
Our “subject” is: Restoration of the balance in international relations and multi-polar system within Central Asia and Eurasia. As well as, the strategic interests amid China, Russia and Iran as a counterbalance to USA involvement in Central Asia and Eurasia.
Our “Research Problem” is: The problem of our current research is the imbalance of international relations, with the prevalence of American hegemony and involvement in other countries affairs disregarding interests, sovereignty and independence of the other countries, and to solve this problem, we put forward two assumptions:-
First: Is the strategic cooperation between of the three countries (China, Iran and Russia) necessary to rebalance the international relations in Central Asia and Eurasia?
Second: Is there a relationship between the New Powers strategic cooperation, and the slow pace of the conflict justified by realists and liberals from American theorists?
Our “Research Goal”:
1- It is an explanation of a prospective alternative to this unipolar world order, or the so-called Neoliberalism, which is expected to collapse soon, or be subject to another similar devastating recession similar to 2008/2009.
2- It is a kind of understanding of the recent strategic cooperation agreements amid the three countries (China, Iran and Russia) which will lead to mend the current world disorder.
Theoretical basis and methodological approaches:
This exactly what my research results will answer in the future with some interviews I carried out with top level experts in this regard that will theorize for a strategic era of cooperation between three countries, as well as to develop a new theory for the system of international relations in the future. In addition, I am using descriptive and comparative analysis, for the same research as they are the most appropriate ones in that respect.
III. Interview Guide for Experts:-
A- Why did we select those experts precisely?
Of course, as a researcher in the field of political economy and strategy, my Master Thesis “A New World Order” tackled several aspects of integration and disintegration amid the States that will reshape the world in the near future. So, I have attached the following list to some experts (but not all), whom I know in person and have dealt with personally or professionally in TV studios for debates, or we met at international or regional conferences, or forums especially Doha Forum 2011-2013, which is considered one of the biggest political and economic forums that took place in the world and from three nationalities of the countries of interest (China, Iran, and Russia).
All of them are specialists in fields related to this “regional and international relations”, including “philosophy, political science, strategy, political economy, economics, and media” and each of them possesses many scientific and professional experiences to offer in this field, and also they are those I rely on in my writings and we previously collaborated on several joint projects.
The common factor of contact between each other is that all of us know perfectly Arabic and English, therefore no lag could take place between each other, as well as the previous experience and deep knowledge in this field in question.
B- Thus they are the experts whom I listed in this following table:-
Ser Name Nationality Field of Expertise
1 Mr. A.K.
(Media and Political Expert) Russian The top-level TV presenter at well-known Russian Arabic channel, has his own successful TV program, ex-successful diplomat, Russian First Secretary at the office of the Ambassador of Russia to Egypt at that time.
2 Ambassador Dr. A.S. (Political and International Relations Expert and Advisor) Iranian Currently North Africa and Middle East Advisor to the Iranian Foreign Minister.
3 Dr. D.L. (Middle East Affairs Expert and Specialist), worked on a very critical topic the relationship between the USA and the Islamist Groups. Chinese The Director of Middle East Institute at the School of Economy and International Relations in Beijing.
Member of the Sino Association of Afro-Asian Studies
C- The type of expert interview we used:-
I always prefer or resort to “merge” both of “Systematizing Expert Interview and Theory Generation Interview”, as both of them focusing on exclusivity of expert knowledge, which used for information that otherwise not accessible, in addition to the existence of comparability and aggregation. As well as they are systematic and gives full disclosure of information and opens more detailed topic list from the expert interviewee.
The interviews, in this regard, follow the same trajectory to be able to compare and aggregate data. The interviewees are considered more than information source and enjoying subjective aspects of experts’ knowledge.
D- Concerning the main questions:
Please note that the three experts are also friends on a personal level, and I have their own mobile and What’s app numbers, and this facilitated a large part of these interviews over the phone.
Because I have coordinated in advance with the experts, and focus on the topic of interest – and accordingly the main questions, with observance to the logical sequence, revolved around the following:-
1- Why a strategic partnership with Iran at this time? How did it happen? Will it succeed?
2- Will the United States stand idly by in front of this alliance?
3- What areas will this partnership include?
4- What will the three countries (China, Iran and Russia) jointly benefit from this strategic partnership?
5- How will this partnership change the balance of power in international relations?
6- What is the vision of the three countries towards the United States now?
IV. Final results of the interviews:-
Fortunately, my prior and good knowledge of the experts, which extends to friendship for several years, and this is a comfortable thing, leads to reassurance regarding the credibility of the guests and their deep specialization under discussion, which is the new strategic partnership between Iran on the one hand, Russia and China on the other hand, in the face of American hegemony and interference in regional affairs, as well as unilateral sanctions.
Therefore, I have compiled the answers of the three experts to the six questions above; in order not to distract the reader, through which there will be coherence in the visions of the future for the three allied countries at this time; as follows:
As for the first question: All the experts believes it was an anticipation process of more unilateral sanctions from America, playing at the worst probabilities of Trump winning a second term in office and foiling the so-called return of Iran to the pre-position 5 + 1 agreement and activating the Snapback Mechanism, which is an extension of the agreement that was signed under President Khatami With the two countries, also they believe that it will succeed to some extent and will secure them from the evil of sanctions and America’s intervention in Central Asia and Eurasia.
As for the second question: There was a negative belief that the United States might change its view. Instead of embracing hostility in the time of (Trump), as may be tempted to settle the conflict with the presence of (Biden) and re-conclude the nuclear agreement with Iran but the opposite has happened. It turned out that the hawks became more ferocious even within the Democratic Party, and no less hostile than the Republican Party. This is in order to pour the loyalty to the lobbies that finance the fierce election campaigns between the two parties, which easily lead their candidate to the Oval Office.
Thus, this hostile spirit led to the current global economic situation and the occurrence of new bankruptcies. That is what we warned about because of the failure to solve the causes of the 2008 recession and even the continuation of American arrogance as they are the strongest country. Rather, they forced a weak country from Eastern Europe (Ukraine) to enter into a losing war with Russia from the outset. Even their media has currently failed to convince their people that the Ukraine war is a defense of democracy and human rights, against the daily repression that is taking place in the West against demonstrators demanding legitimate social rights. I believe that (France and Israel) are the biggest witnesses to what we say that the Western peoples are powerless against the owners of companies and the brutal oligarchy that changes heads of state according to its whim.
As for the third question: The three experts recognized that the cooperation amid the three countries will include “oil and gas, communications, strategy, nuclear energy, and other agreements related to trade in the Eurasian region, scientific exchange and cooperation at university and medical level.
As for the fourth question: Three parties believe in more control over the situation in the Central Asia and Eurasia region, and of course increased trade benefits through the Silk Road and the Eurasian Trade Union, and more scientific, security and technical cooperation.
As for the fifth question: Certainly, this strategic alliance, which is different from the previous agreements, will constitute a new buffer against all American and Western practices in this sensitive region of the world and amid some of the ten most strategic countries in the world.
As for the sixth question: All of them agreed that they did not initiate evil towards the United States, and that their hands were extended to cooperate with the United States provided that respecting international law, not interfering in the affairs of others, as well as not imposing action/opinion by force.
What some American administrations have done, including the current ones, has harmed America’s image abroad, although the American people are not satisfied with these practices that distort them, and also all the experts wish to have an appearance in the American media to show some facts before the American people; because unfortunately the power of the media is being exploited, whereas the American demonizes everyone who stands in the way of America; and they will allow Americans to appear in return in their media.
Everyone wishes for the benefits of all the peoples of the world, especially in light of the Coronavirus crisis – and they believed that this crisis would make America more flexible and cooperate with all countries of the world, especially with them – but unfortunately the exact opposite occurred.
V. Self-Reflection Concerning Limitations and Miscellaneous in Conducting these Interviews:-
1- The task was not easy at all, not because of the lack of experts, or the lack of my previous experience, but this task comes in the midst of other important activities I carry out to promote my center’s business activities.
“Bearing in mind that experts on such level I carried out the interviews with are always busy.”
2- The time difference for some – especially since China is six (6) hours ahead of Cairo, and therefore I had to not sleep every day before 4 in the morning, in order to be able to make my contact with my friend expert Dr. D L in Beijing, the Chinese capital, and about three times each time ranging from 5-10 minutes.
3- Perhaps with Mr. A.K. I seem freer, due to his mastery of the Egyptian dialect for his work as a former diplomat in Egypt.
4- There is confidence from the Russian and Chinese sides in the Iranian side – and this is why relations between the three countries are developing rapidly, and the Russians and Chinese always describe the Iranian side as: “respectable and responsible, and its decisions are well thought out, not random, and serve their regional and international interests.”
5-This research could be applicable currently as there is no big difference between Elephants or Donkeys’ administration as long as the lobbies are controlling the decision making in USA.
Please be guided accordingly.
Kindest Regards,
*The writer:
Director of Asia Center for Studies and Translator
“Eye on the Orient” a joint project with AlAhram Gate
Member of CODESRIA, Dakar Senegal and
Group of Strategic Vision Russia and Islamic World
Master holder in Political Economy and Russian Studies – HSE Moscow
Cellphone: +201009229411
Email: solimon2244@yahoo.com
