IRANIAN DILEMMA

Important developments are now taking place around Iran, affecting not only regional, but also all world politics. Perhaps the most significant of them is the real shift in the dialogue between the Islamic Republic and the West.

On the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, who participated in it, held talks with several European leaders, particularly French President Francois Hollande. But the most remarkable is the meeting with British Prime Minister David Cameron, which was the first at the level of the leaders of the Islamic Republic and the United Kingdom since the 1979 Iranian revolution. When you consider that until recently, Tehran was officially one of the "enemies of America", and London, following in the footsteps of American policy, held a view similar to that of the United States, it is difficult to overestimate the importance of the negotiations between Rouhani and Cameron. In fact, the West, including, above all, its Anglo-Saxon component, finally acknowledged that Iran is no longer stigmatized as a rogue state and that it is advisable to engage in dialogue with it.

Apparently, the main subject of discussion at the meeting of the Iranian president and the British premier was the question about the prospects for cooperation in the fight against the Islamic State, which operates in Iraq and Syria and is equally hostile to the West and Iran.

It should be borne in mind that the issue of the fight against the Islamic State is considered by Tehran in the context of the general worsening of the situation of Iran around the perimeter of its borders. The proclamation of a "caliphate" by radical Islamists in northern Iraq and in the eastern regions of Syria - territories controlled mainly by Sunnis - in fact marked the opening of an anti- Shia front. This is also clear from relations between Iran and the Gulf monarchies, which are far from being unclouded, as they act as inspirers of radical political Islam on the one hand and use the struggle between the West and the Islamic State for attacking Syria, an ally of Iran, on the other. In addition, the West and the Arab monarchies keep the Lebanese Shia movement Hezbollah - another ally of Iran, as well as Syria at gunpoint. However, the problem for the West is that it is precisely the so-called Shia arc - Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah - that acts as its natural ally in the fight against radical Islam, which is gaining momentum in the Middle East. Therefore, the West is forced to recognize the important role of Iran in regional geopolitical configuration, which largely encourages the United States and Europe for a dialogue with Tehran. This fact is not even refuted by Washington's refusal to cooperate with Iran in the international coalition against Islamic State terrorists.

Meanwhile, for Iran itself the dialogue with the West is a chance to somehow influence the policy of the latter in connection with other Iranian security challenges, to which the same United States and the EU have a direct relationship. Take, for example, the Kurdish problem, which is actively promoted by the West in Iraq and Syria. The prospect of creating a state of Kurdistan in the Kurdish-populated regions of these countries, which will definitely be pro-American in nature, does not promise any benefit to Iran. After all, for the Islamic Republic, Kurdish separatism is not an unknown phenomenon.

The picture of geopolitical difficulties for Iran is also supplemented by the threat from the east - namely, from Afghanistan, which may well become the prey of the Central Asian counterpart of the Islamic State - the Taleban - after the withdrawal of American troops. As a result, this will not only damage political and economic ties actively established between Tehran and Kabul in recent years. The danger is that Iran might be surrounded by radical Islamists who believe their enemy is not only the West, but also the Islamic Republic itself.

Iran, of course, is mobilizing its forces for a proper response to new challenges facing it. But, developing the dialogue with the West, which meets Iranian interests in general, Tehran does not forget to specify who exactly the world is indebted to for the strengthening of radical Islam. In his speech at the UN General Assembly, Hassan Rouhani directly accused the West of a "strategic blunder" and pursuing a policy that turned the Middle East, Central Asia and the Caucasus into a "haven for terrorists and extremists".

The West, however, now appears to be in no condition to be offended by such criticism and ignore the chance to use the resources of Tehran in its great regional game. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to change the tactics of the United States and Europe in this regard. Speaking from the UN rostrum, he said that Iran is a much greater threat to security in the region than the Islamic State extremist group. Tel Aviv continues to persuade the world of the military nature of the Iranian nuclear programme. Netanyahu called for the "complete elimination of the Iranian military nuclear capability", calling Tehran's readiness for dialogue "an attempt to lift international sanctions in order to remove obstacles to the creation of the atomic bomb". The Israeli prime minister personally asked President Barack Obama about it, saying that it is necessary to make every effort to ensure that Iran does not have even the technological capability to build nuclear weapons.

Nonetheless, the USA, which is one of the "six" international negotiators with Iran, still intends to reach a compromise on this issue. It is possible that an agreement will be signed in November, which will lead, on the one hand, to greater transparency in Tehran's nuclear programme, and on the other, to the gradual lifting of sanctions against the Islamic Republic. Rouhani himself is sure that it is possible to achieve a final agreement on the nuclear programme if the West demonstrates "flexibility".

The Iranians' hope for the "flexibility" of the West, in fact, can justify itself for another important reason. The United States and the European Union need Iran for the sake of energy expediency, since the rapprochement between Iran and the West is also motivated by the desire of the latter to undermine Europe's energy dependence on Russia. According to the calculations of Western politicians, the discovery of Iran's oil and gas reserves may help achieve this for the world. According to expert estimates, Iran has the world's third largest oil and the fourth largest gas reserves. Moreover, gas reserves are only beginning to be developed, and therefore, for Western companies it is not expedient to continue to keep Iranian hydrocarbons locked up. It seems that the British are among the first to have understood this, which is why the New York meeting between Rouhani and Cameron cannot be considered accidental also in terms of the energy interests of the parties.

Back in December of last year, Tehran expressed the hope that the British companies BP and Shell would invest in Iran's energy sector. Iran is also actively holding talks on energy cooperation with France. Finally, at the meeting with Austrian President Heinz Fischer on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session, Hasan Rouhani stated that the government of Iran is ready to export the gas resources of the country through Austria to the rest of Europe.

Thus, Tehran clearly expressed its interest in the supply of energy resources to Western markets. And this prospect, indeed, can be realized in the current geopolitical situation in Europe, which is characterized by an increasing confrontation between the West and Russia over Ukraine. However, Tehran's policy clearly shows its unwillingness to become the trump card of the West against Russia. Taking part in the Astrakhan summit of Caspian littoral states, Iran's president expressed concern over Western sanctions against Russia. "This is the wrong tool. With these sanctions, they are trying to counter other countries," Rouhani said. 

However, will Iran be able to avoid the prospect of becoming an energy weapon of the West? Will it be able, after becoming a partner of the West, to avoid becoming a major competitor or opponent of Russia? Most likely, the diplomatic forces of Tehran will be engaged in preventing the second scenario, which does not meet the interests of Iran and Russia.