Iran’s security approach in its peripheral environment

Since it is located in Middle East, Iran faces serious threats, challenges and developments. Regional security arrangements around the world have created an acceptable level of security for many countries, but Middle East is one of those atypical regions and there is not any sign that a security order in peripheral environment of Iran is going to be established.

 

Lack of a comprehensive and sustained security order and continuation of insecurity and instability in Middle East is related to different factors of which we can refer to the geopolitical situation of Middle East and its huge oil and gas resource -that lead to further presence of transregional powers in Iran’s peripheral environment-, radicalism, ethnic and sectarian clashes, terrorism, weak states and distrust among regional actors.

 

Due to unique features of Middle East and the role of different factors at sub-national, national, regional and transregional level, any successful security arrangement requires consideration of all these factors through a step-by-step and pervasive approach. In this article we will discuss regional security models and challenges in Iran’s peripheral environment at first. Then, Iran’s security approach in its peripheral environment will be studied with regard to these models and challenges.

 

 

Security and models of regional security have undergone essential transformations especially after the Cold War. Developments after 9/11 and unilateral behaviors of United States in Middle East have created new prospects and shifts in regional security. One of the major actors of regional security arrangements, i.e. Iraq, experienced fundamental changes with the fall of the Baath Party and efforts taken to establish a democratic regime in the country. Following that, new definitions for establishing security in the region were put forth. This reduced the importance of some security models and highlighted other certain models.

 

With regard to regional developments in the past few years and also characteristics of Iran’s peripheral environment, the most important security models for Middle East and their key features will be surveyed.

 

 

This model is based on overt and covert military threats. But the existence of these threats doesn’t mean overlooking sovereignty, national interests and security concerns of other actors. In this model states occupying different poles have fluid relations based on their short-term interests that may vary through time, the balance of power is accepted and in general, no country is regarded as an eternal friend or enemy. There are various levels of shared or conflicting interests between all countries. Shared interests help the countries to ally with each other. According to this model, the traditional structure of balance of power is more effective as to management of security affairs since:

1.      the countries relatively share the same values and interests and as a result, their definition of national security is similar;

2.      countries trust each other and don’t disturb the order to spread a set of certain values;

3.      countries respect the sovereignty and independence of each other;

4.      the existence of transnational and domestic movement and ideologies doesn’t defy the central role of independent countries;

5.      Political priorities of countries are timeless and predictable and this per se builds trust.

 

 

The second model for setting a regional security framework is the hegemonic model. In this model the interests of a group of countries have priority over interests of another group. Military and economic capabilities are used to enforce the deterrence policy. As this model presumes, friends and foes are separated. The hegemonic security model is based on:

 

1.      Having a feeling of needlessness towards allies or other powers, unilateralism and reliance of the hegemon power on its own capabilities and strategies to solve regional or global problems;

2.      Reliance of the hegemon power on military and economic tools (hard power) to advance its objectives.

 

The hegemon power needs countries within the region or international stage to safeguard its interests and deter threats towards the hegemonic stability.

 

This is the model pursued in Middle East by United States after 11^th of September 2001. America’s aim to establish the security model of hegemonic stability in the region may be considered in direction of the country’s global objectives and the global powers’ contest to control Middle East.

 

Using force to shape the security structure of the region and the presence of a large number of military forces is prioritized in this model and by dividing states into friends and foes, all options are used to exert pressure and undermine unfriendly countries as much as possible.

 

This model views international diplomacy from a different perspective. Its central assumption is that all countries can ensure their security by accepting mutual commitments to restrict their military capacity.

 

In this security approach it is also presumed that not only friends and allies, but also enemies will accept restrictions and that would be a possible goal despite mutual distrust.

 

Also it is assumed that these legal and technical restrictions will bring privilege with themselves. In this model, security guarantees are achieved not through hegemony but by obviating options that lead to hegemony.

 

In cooperation-based security approach, security is increasingly defined as a joint sphere that can not be partitioned. This approach does not divide countries into friends, allies and enemies. The threats are the same for every actor and all partners demand mutual security.

 

Besides extending the definition of security beyond traditional military concerns, cooperation-based security includes social, economic and environmental concerns and tries to deepen the notion of mutuality of security.

 

Instead of proposing a set of formulas for establishment of an order regional security, it encompasses a gradual process that intends to shape the understanding of policymakers on security. This model introduces alternatives that go beyond the limited military-oriented definition of security.

 

This approach stresses consultation, trust, transparency, prevention and interdependence against confrontation, deterrence, stealth, prosecution and unilateralism.

 

What is emphasized in cooperation-based security approach is a regional understanding of mutual security and the focus is more on mutual trust-building rather than deterrence. Reinforcement of such a trust can solve the security puzzle that is essentially rooted in realistic strategies of power policy.

 

This approach has been developed to facilitate connection between a broad range of political, economic and social affairs and build trust between regional states through discussion, negotiation, cooperation and agreement. Development of cooperation-based security is an evolutionary process, not directed by a master plan but through devising a set of tools that each individually reinforces the principles of cooperation-based security.

 

Cooperation-based security first of all focuses on precluding inter-state disputes. It also aims to guarantee security of individuals or groups in a country.

 

This approach also has an eye on non-governmental voices and besides emphasizing promotion of dialogue and cooperation among governments, advocates informal security talks among non-governmental actors such as elite and scholars. Therefore, in addition to national actors, negotiation approach that advocates cooperation-based security heeds sub-national actors and voices as complementary elements.

 

 

Iran has always faced various challenges that have been reproduced in all domains of peripheral environment. For this, Iran has not witnessed formation of a sustained security framework in any of these domains.

 

Iran’s security challenges rooted in its peripheral environment have appeared in different forms, ranging from border tensions and temporary unrests to attacks and prolonged wars, but the challenges are currently manifested in other ways.

 

Terrorism, radicalism, weak states suffering crisis of authority and intervention of transregional powers are Iran’s three chief security challenges that are closely interrelated. But it seems that weak states and crisis of authority are the most serious threats that foster the two other.

 

Rule of weak states in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan has led to spread of terrorism and radicalism and it has paved the way for continued presence of transregional powers in the region. The weakness and crisis of authority of Arab states of Persian Gulf’s southern coast have also prepared grounds for asymmetrical cooperation of transregional powers and their increasing intervention.

 

Due to the ethnic and social composition of the region and certain cases of nation-state creation these problems complicate security circumstances. Ethnic tensions, authoritarian regimes, legitimacy crisis, inexistence of democracy and civil institutions along with the ailing economy of some Central Asian countries and Caucasus are other factors that cause instability and insecurity in Iran’s peripheral environment.

 

Religious and ethnic terrorism and radicalism have increased during the recent years and this significantly influences the socio-political order and economic development in the region. Wahhabism and Salafism as radical religious ideologies have been the main agents of spreading of terrorism and religious tensions and they have found more space to propagate due to the chaos in the region and political interests of some actors.

 

Radicalism and terrorism in Iraq, although intensified by various internal and external factors, have now turned into a main source of instability and insecurity themselves. Radicalism and terrorism are still prevalent in Afghanistan and Pakistan because of different socio-political elements and external factors, which heavily influence security and stability of the region.

 

Presence of transregional powers in oil-rich and geopolitically important Middle East has been always considered as a constituent of the region’s security structure but in the recent years and especially after 11^th of September 2001, transregional interferences have increased significantly. U.S. has talked of hegemonic security after 9/11 and based on this approach, it has increased its military forces and toppled the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.

 

Bound to this policy, i.e. hegemonic security, Washington attempts to separate allies and opponents, put non-cooperative states under pressure and demand maximum cooperation from allies to establish its hegemonic security as the chief security structure of the region. War against terrorism was introduced as one of the main goals of U.S. in expanding its presence in the region and reinforcing its model of hegemonic security.

 

United States’ strong presence in the region and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan that was followed with regional reactions paved the way for spread of radicalism and terrorism. In fact measures and strategies that aimed to root out terrorism backfired.

 

Rise of terrorist groups, with its capacity to create threats, was a result of power vacuum in Iraq and turned security into a new problem. Due to the mosaic ethnic and religio-cultural composition of Middle East, weakness of the central government compounded with lack of the sufficient structures can threaten regional stability and security.

 

Another point about the presence of transregional powers in Iran’s peripheral environment is its effect on the natural order and cooperation among states of the region. Since in hegemonic security approach interests and objectives of the transregional power are prioritized and states are divided into friends and enemies, cooperation between states of the region based on their natural, long-term interests that would result in a sustained cooperation-based security structure will face new problems. Hence, common security threats and challenges that will be problematic for most of the countries in long-term will be neglected.

 

 

Before the Islamic Revolution, Iran’s security approach in the region was based on alliance and convergence with West, especially the U.S. Within the Cold War framework and United States’ strategy in Middle East, Iran, along with Saudi Arabia, were two security pillars of United States in the region. After the Islamic Revolution of Iran, this country moved towards adoption of an independent security policy and its efforts where to define itself free from strategies and approaches of the two global superpowers. In this direction cooperation with regional actors to form the regional security affairs of the regions was given priority.

 

In its peripheral environment, Iran follows a cooperation-based security approach. Active cooperation of all the countries of the region in shaping the regional security structure is prioritized. On the other hand, continued presence of transregional powers is rejected and regarded as a major cause of tension increase.

 

The hegemonic security model that was implemented after 11^th of September 2001 -with heavy presence of U.S. and its attempts to establish multifaceted military ties- was not welcomed due to its inefficiency. It also lost its validity as a sustainable effective approach when its aftermath was spread of conflicts, terrorism and radicalism in the recent years.

 

Iran’s security approach enjoys features that if the region takes notice of it, can end in formation of a sustained security order. The first feature of this approach is a reduction in the military presence of regional powers. Up to now this presence has aggravated radicalism and terrorism and damaged cooperation and natural ties of the countries of the region.

 

The second feature is cooperation between regional actors –especially Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia- in the security structure. This cooperation is particularly important in common challenges like terrorism and management of the interaction model of sub-national ethno-religious groups. But war against radicalism and terrorism must be accompanied by complementary policies that can one the one hand, sustain central governments’ power to control and on the other hand, prevent radicalization of ethno-religious movements by defining mechanisms for cooperation of sub-national groups.

 

Due to the breadth of security challenges and conflicts in Middle East and the influence of different factors on instability of the region at sub-national, national, regional and transregional level, building up security in the framework of a cooperation-based security model, requires a sustained, long-term process. Within this process, regional cooperation is realized only through step-by-step trust-building, creating mutual trust among countries and trying to solve challenges which are the outcome of structural conflicts such as the problems of nation-state building and a weakness in culture and democratic procedures.

 

Based on this approach, the Islamic Republic of Iran is trying to solve security challenges in its peripheral environment with the cooperation of regional actors. The nature and type of security challenges in each of the security spheres are different; however, challenges in each have common features that can be resolved gradually on the basis of cooperation-based security approach.

 

2/3 of world proved resources of oil and 1/3 of world proved resources of gas lie in The Persian Gulf. For this, and its geopolitical situation, this region is considerably important and this has increased the presence of transregional powers in this region.

 

Since United Kingdom withdrew from east of Suez Canal, the United States has become the major actor in Persian Gulf and its strategies have influenced security arrangements of the region.

 

During the 1970s, United States’ security strategy relied on Iran and Saudi Arabia, in 1980s this strategy turned into a balance of weakness between Iran and Iraq and in 1990s U.S. chief policy in Persian Gulf was dual containment of Iran and Iraq. After the first Persian Gulf War in 1991, America increased its military presence in the region and bilateral security pacts between the United States and Arab countries of the southern coast of Persian Gulf pinned this presence. United States’ 2003 attack on Iraq based on the hegemonic security model, added to Washington’s influence on security arrangements of Persian Gulf. In fact, U.S. became the key element in Middle East security.

 

Non-formation of sustained security arrangements that would be accepted by all Persian Gulf states, plus United States increased presence, is Iran’s main security challenge in its southern sphere. The challenges root in factors such as:

 

 

Due to these challenges in Persian Gulf and in accord with the general security approach prevailing in the region, Iran’s priority in foreign diplomacy has turned into increasing cooperation among countries to create a sustained and regional security arrangement.

 

Hence, Iran has continuously followed a course of détente and trust-building policy with Persian Gulf Arab states. Iran regards America’s presence in the region as an obstacle against consolidation of ties with Arab countries and believes that bilateral military-security relations of these countries with United States are the major setback to its interactions with these countries.

 

In driving forward its security approaches in Persian Gulf and bringing Arab states on board to develop a cooperation-based security model, Iran faces obstacles that are the result of historical courses and recent regional developments.

 

Lack of full trust between Iran and Arab states, political differences, presence of U.S. in the region, fall of Saddam’s regime followed with Iran’s new view on Iraq, regional developments of the recent years that have increased Iran’s power and influence –consequently swinging the regional balance of power towards Iran- and finally, doubts and misunderstandings on Iran’s nuclear program are the main problems.

 

These problems, arising from competitive realistic policy which is based on balance of power, can be resolved only with adopting a cooperative approach and gradual decrease of distrust and pessimism. Therefore a security model based on cooperation increases connections, adds to the transparency of aims and interests of countries in foreign diplomacy, gradually solves the disputes, builds trust and reduces small countries’ reliance on transregional powers. It also prepares grounds for rising of a sustained and security mechanism in Persian Gulf.

 

 

Iraq has been always considered as one of the pillars of security in the region and it has always been a major security threat against Iran. Most tangible is the 8-year war it waged against Iran in 1980s.

 

With the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003 and the consequent security circumstances of the country, Iraq’s developments have become significantly influential on security issues of the region. Therefore, we elaborate Iraq’s situation separately.

 

For a predictable future, security threats of Iraq will be insignificant. Fall of Saddam’s regime has been followed with the establishment of a pluralistic and democratic system in Iraq that lacks the aggressive and threatening characteristics of the former regime.

 

However, the new post-Saddam circumstances have led to formation of new threats against Iran of which we can name spread of radicalism, terrorism and ethno-religious tensions in this country and a possibility that it extends to the entire region, and increased presence of U.S. military forces near Iran’s border.

 

Iran believes that formation of a new democratic system in Iraq can provide new opportunities for the region and bring them the minimum requirements needed to develop peace and regional stability. Hence, supporting Iraq’s central government and aiding it to control insecurity and manage ethno-religious tensions, supporting the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq are cornerstones of Iran’s foreign diplomacy in post-Saddam Iraq. Eradication of terrorism and radicalism -that can affect Iraq’s neighbors- is important.

 

As to the presence of foreign troops in Iraq, Iran believes that after the new government of Baghdad has been established, and with the gradual reinforcement of the security and military forces of Iraq, the American troops must end their military and political presence in this country.

 

If, along with reinforcement of the political and military structures of Iraq, the presence of American troops in Iraq continues, it will cause challenges for optimum management and enforcement of the Iraqi government in its course of resolving problems. From this viewpoint supporting the central government of Iraq is important.

 

Iran’s support for the new regime of Baghdad and its efforts to establish security in the country, have started from the early days the new political structure was born. With its political and economic support and humanitarian aids, Iran followed a policy different from that of other countries of the region. Not only these countries haven’t showed any political support, but also there is evidence that show they fuel terrorism in Iraq.

 

In sum, Iran believes that cooperation between countries of the region to solve the current problems of Iraq by supporting its central government is the key solution to decrease instability, terrorism and radicalism in the entire region, and an agreement between regional actors in this area can be a basis for broader cooperation for development of a regional security framework accepted by all parties.

 

Although during the last 3 decades Iran’s focus has been its western borders, the country has suffered severe damages through its eastern borders too and has always faced security challenges in this area, especially after the division of Indian sub-continent into two political entities, border disputes between Pakistan and India and Pakistan and Afghanistan and the communist coup of 1979 in Afghanistan.

 

Iran has always suffered the negative impacts of tensions and instabilities in its eastern borders and security concerns in east have turned into one of the country’s main problems.

 

Iran’s security problems in east are:

 

 

- Lack of the required stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan: this is rooted in various structural reasons and interferences of other countries. In Afghanistan, the government controls only limited areas and a reviving Taliban is stretching its control over the country.

 

In some parts of the country, Taliban has a strong base and Karzai’s administration, despite the support it receives from foreign powers and some Afghan political figures, has not managed yet to increase its acceptability in many parts of Afghanistan. Also in Pakistan, political conflicts and identity-related problems mutually aggravate each other and lead to further instability and tension among different groups and ethnicities and ultimately the government.

 

Lack of a powerful government in Afghanistan and many a number of economic problems, has increased opium cultivation from 2200 tons to 8500 tons. Also, drug transit and immigration have increased significantly. All these problems can spread to Iran and in addition to economic and social impacts have negative security outcomes for Iran.

 

- Spread of religious radicalism: around Iran, there are agents which fuel religious clashes. The negative impact causes security threats for Iran and in fact, it has made problems all across the eastern borders of Iran.

 

Radicalism is a problem for the entire region and it is highly capable of destabilizing the region. Radical movements in Pakistan and Afghanistan against Iran and Shiites are becoming more active with support from some Sunnite clerics.

 

-Presence of foreign military troops: after toppling Taliban, U.S. forces were dispatched to different areas of Afghanistan, there constructing bases for themselves and NATO forces. This is a threat per se for Iran and leaves the country prone to threats by those against its national interests.

 

Iran follows an approach of establishing security in its eastern borders. This policy is enforced through the following measures:

 

 

Therefore, Iran’s strategy in its eastern borders is a cooperation-seeking and peace-seeking one. Iran does its best to establish peace and stability in problem-inflicted Pakistan and Afghanistan, since their problems rapidly extends to other countries of the region, including Iran and this is not at all beneficial for Iran’s national interests.

 

The main problems in Caucasus and Central Asia which affect neighbors’ security include:

 

The increasing trend of organized, transnational crime that is conspicuous in some parts of Central Asia and Caucasus has affected the security of region and some neighbors. Organized crimes are the aftermath of prolonged armed clashes in the region, especially in Caucasus that have resulted in increasing weakness of governments in the region. In other words, continuation of tensions in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, Ossetia and Chechnya has resulted in rise of crimes. The most important organized crimes are:

 

Central Asia and Caucasus are the drug transit corridor and currently, 87% of drugs that move towards Russia and markets of West, pass through this region. The northern route that passes through the mountainous Badakhshan province and the Fergana Valley has become more important after Iran’s campaign against drug trafick in its eastern borders. Today it is estimated that 65% of the drug produced in Afghanistan is transported through the Central Asia corridor.

 

Unlike the drug trade route that ran from east to west, for arms smuggling there’s a north-south route that passes arms from Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia through Caucasus and then Middle East. The east-west route is the scene for smuggling weapons from Asia to Europe and the south-north corridor is used for moving small modern weapons from some Arab countries of Middle East to areas such as Chechnya.

 

In Caucasus, especially regions where the central government has no authority, citizens hold weapons and no serious disarmament plan has been launched up to now. This can lead to a catastrophe in times of instability or even by a simple accident.

 

Ethnic tensions in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia show that destabilizing elements in the region. Ethnic disputes have undermined many economic and industrial structures, fostered organized crimes and most important, have led to political instability in the region.

 

On the other hand, these tensions will promote ethnic nationalism in an ideological form. Currently Azerbaijan-Armenia face-off on Nagorno-Karabakh and disputes between the central government of Georgia and secessionist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are still unsolved.

 

Although USSR’s legacy, weakness of central governments and meddling by foreign powers is the reason for emergence and continuation of these tensions, other factors such as lack of civil education, rise of ethnic sentiments among minorities against efforts to maintain domination, rereading history to discover ethnic prides and finally political radicalism are also playing roles here.

 

Additionally, in Caucasus, there are other elements contributing to ethnic tensions including the prominence of ethnic identity in Caucasus compared with other former U.S.SR territories and insistence on keeping the local language and its variants in Caucasus in confrontation with Russifying the region.

 

As we can see all these problems are rooted in weak, corrupt governments and incompetence of rulers in running a functional system.

 

Since there’s a security vacuum in the region after Soviet Union collapsed, and this has influenced economic and political developments in the region and expansion of ties, all countries of the region and powers within or outside the region focused on establishment of security arrangements.

 

For this reason various models were proposed by major actors of the region that do not take into consideration the interests of all countries. The only positive common point among these plans is the stress they put on the stability of the region. However, they have different viewpoints for their common goal that is a result of conflict between their interests

 

Different viewpoints on security in Central Asia and Caucasus have created a circumstance in which various security models have been proposed by regional and transregional powers. Tensions and discrepancies have firstly resulted in an impossibility of concordance over the proposed security models and secondly in substantial differences over definition of security in the region.

 

Aware of the necessity of détente and establishment of regional peace and stability, from the very first beginning Iran tried mediate in regional crises. Within its détente security model and opposing any foreign intervention in its peripheral environment, Iran launched extensive efforts to establish regional security. Definitely geopolitical features, ethnic homogeneity and political and economic power have given Iran the power for this.

 

Within its framework of security outlook, Iran believes any attempt to militarize the region, form military blocs and pave the way for presence of outside actors, can’t bring sustained security. Regional security must be established by countries by the region. It also believes that a basic, reassuring formula that can be the basis of concordance for all countries of the region, can guarantee security. On the other hand, any security arrangement that ignores one or more countries is not only complete but also can render the ignored countries into sources of instability in the region.

 

Therefore, the model presented by the Islamic Republic of Iran for control of internal and regional crises and establishment of security in southern Caucasus region, is the 3+3 formula that comprises three Caucasian states Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia plus three neighboring powers, i.e. Iran, Russia and Turkey.

 

Of course Iran is not against presence of other countries after the security arrangements have been set, in case it is not destructive and moves in accord with peace and stability in the region. On the other hand, Iran believes that peace and political stability in Central Asia and Caucasus is achievable only when economic and social development becomes possible. This is why expansion of bilateral ties with Caucasian and Central Asian countries is Iran’s top priority in foreign diplomacy.

 

Why Iran has adopted this approach goes back to the nature of new threats that demands for a new role by the actors. New threats caused by weaknesses in political and economic structures, call for more attention by regional powers, avoidance of any kind of competition and solution of threats based on active cooperation.

 

In its peripheral environment, Iran faces various security challenges that are recreated continuously as a result of regional developments. Plus, the Islamic Republic of Iran is located in an area where no sustained and security arrangements have been made.

 

Despite progress in regional security models all around the world, especially after the Cold War and within the globalization framework, Iran’s peripheral environment yet lacks any institutionalized security arrangements. Terrorism, radicalism, ethno-religious tensions, organized crimes, failed states and intervention by transregional powers are some of the challenges and security problems Iran faces in its periphery.

 

To reduce security threats in its peripheral environment and to facilitate improvement in regional security, Iran has adopted a strategy of cooperation-based security with the participation of other regional actors, to solve security challenges and problems.

 

The thing counts within this framework, is helping formation of functional and powerful governments that can control internal tensions and instabilities. The next important think is increase of cooperation between states of the region and intelligence exchange to improve security of the region.

 

Restricting the influence and role of transregional powers in security arrangements of the region in order to create a local security mechanism is considered important in Iran’s strategy, but this does not imply neglecting international potentials to improve regional security and reduce threats, on the contrary, international potentials can be exploited through international organizations.

 

 Institutions such as United Nations and its affiliate organizations have an important role in improving security circumstances of countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and humanitarian and economic aids also can be considered means to establish security.