ARMLESS WAR

- Tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran are intensifying with each passing day. What is the main hidden reason behind this conflict? Why was the Shiite preacher executed just now, although he had been arrested in 2011 and sentenced to capital punishment in 2014?

- One can say that Saudi Arabia took all its actions in an orderly manner. Iran's entry onto the international scene following the conclusion of the Vienna accords; the lifting of sanctions on Iran, the involvement of the IRI in the process of Syria conflict settlement, Iran's successful policy to keep Bashar al-Assad in power for the transitional period and its active work against Saudi Arabia's positions in Syria, Iraq, Bahrain and Yemen prompted Riyadh to take the provocative decision to execute the Shiite preacher Nimr al-Nimr. By all appearances, the Saudis expected a very sharp response from Tehran and, possibly, some military actions by the Iranian armed forces. They did so to incite Iran and demonstrate its non-peace-loving essence to European states. It should be said that Riyadh did partially achieve its goal as the embassy of Saudi Arabia in Tehran and its consulate in Mashhad were seized. The fact that the protesters managed to break into the diplomatic missions is a result of confrontation started between Iran's radical conservative and pragmatic liberal pro-reform political elites. 

The thing is that there are radical forces within Iran's political and military elites who stand for combat actions against Saudi Arabia. They believe that Riyadh's entire policy is aimed at oppressing the Shiites, ousting Iran from the Middle East region and destabilizing the state of Iran. Knowing that there is such a position within the Iranian elite, the Saudis decided to take advantage of this factor and executed the preacher al-Nimr who enjoyed prestige throughout the Middle East and, most importantly, he had always called for reconciliation between the Sunnis and the Shiites. 

Official Tehran has censured the seizure of the embassy. It declared its adherence to international law and promised to hold a thorough investigation into this incident. I do not believe though that the attacks on the diplomatic missions were spontaneous. There were specific radical forces behind the protesters. It was an external manifestation of internal political contradictions. Most probably, the idea to seize the Saudi embassy as well as that of the United Kingdom in 2009 had come from the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution and their subdivision Basij. 

- Both sides to the conflict are concentrating their forces. The Saudis basically rely on the Gulf states, while Iran relies on states of the region: Pakistan, Lebanon and others. What is the likelihood of war between Tehran and Riyadh, and can this develop into a great intra-faith war between the Sunnis and the Shiites? 

- The present-day world is so unpredictable that nothing can be ruled out as impossible. Three years ago, we knew nothing about ISIL; it was hard to imagine that the Russian air force would give military support to Damascus, no-one could have imagined that relations between Turkey and Russia could worsen that much. It is impossible to predict or rule out anything for certain in the Middle East, which has been seething for five years now. In my view, the probability of a direct military conflict between Tehran and Riyadh equals zero. At least Iran is pragmatically minded and aware of what such a military conflict can lead to. The current leadership of Iran assesses the situation competently and is doing its best on the diplomatic front to prevent a military conflict. War is not in the interests of Saudi Arabia either, as it is having significant economic problems; the dynasty is in a very complicated situation. By causing tensions in relations with Iran the authorities of Saudi Arabia waned to make it clear that Riyadh was unhappy with the pro-Shiite coalition gaining strength in the Middle East region: the Alawites in Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen. The Saudis failed to achieve their political goals in Syria or in Yemen. So this is a clumsy attempt by Riyadh to demonstrate its discontent with Iran to the EU states and the USA.

- Can external conflicts provoke internal turmoil? Iran is making statements about the soon fall of the monarchy in Saudi Arabia. Do the Saudis hope for support from the Sunni minority in Iran?

- The Iranians have been speaking about the soon fall of the despotic monarchy in Saudi Arabia for 35 years now. In the first years after the Islamic Revolution, Iran was even taking some efforts to overthrow the monarchy in Saudi Arabia where there is a significant Shiite stratum in the population. No doubt, the current events are a blow dealt to stability of the regime in Saudi Arabia. Iran will support the Saudi opposition, not at the state level but through some Muslim funds and organizations. Yet in terms of distribution, the Shiites make up an enclave in Saudi Arabia, and the authorities helped by the army and the security service can aptly keep the Shiites under control. Indeed, the Riyadh regime is getting weaker but no-one can say that a break-up of the monarchy is expected in the near future. As regards Iran, the Sunnis do not exceed 10 per cent in that country. Iran has problems in mutual relations between the Sunnis and the Shiites but the leadership of the state has recently started attending to those problems. Thus for instance, the president of Iran has a special adviser on matters of ethnic and religious minorities. By the way, it has been suggested that a Sunni consultative council should be set up at the state level. Indeed, unlike Armenian Christian and Zoroastrian communities, the Sunnis have no faction of their own in the parliament of the country. Sunnis may be elected only from the provinces where they live. They are represented in parliament but have no organized faction. Iran's progressive development will create opportunities to secure some role for them in government structures. A Sunni uprising, their confrontation with the Shiite majority and especially the overthrow of Iran's ruling regime is absolute nonsense; nothing of this kind can happen.

- Can a religiously motivated conflict, in this case, between the Shiites of Iran and the Salafis of Saudi Arabia, expand to neighbouring countries: Azerbaijan, Russia and the states of Central Asia? 

- The confrontation between the IRI and Saudi Arabia has not passed its peak yet. Enmity between them will be growing. Quite probably, reverberations of this confrontation may affect Sunni and Shiite communities in Azerbaijan, Russia and countries of Central Asia. However, religious strife between Iran and Saudi Arabia and in the Middle East in general is politically motivated. Struggle for power and resources is becoming a key point being superposed through certain forces on existing religious contradictions. The prevalent factors in the rise of conflict between the IRI and SA are political and geopolitical. 

This explains the fact that we cannot see any intra-faith confrontation or bitter struggle between Muslim currents in Azerbaijan and Russia. The matter is that sustainable stability and economic prosperity in a state enable it to eliminate possible negative factors in intra-faith relations and prevent external developments from upsetting interfaith peace.  

- In that case, what is the place of the religious factor in exacerbating relations between the two influential states claiming leadership in the Sunni and the Shiite world? 

- Geopolitics is in the first place, economics and social problems in the second and religious factors are only in the third place. 

- Russia has offered its assistance in settling relations between the IRI and Saudi Arabia… 

- People in Russia are aware that this conflict needs to be settled as soon as possible, because procrastination and escalation have a negative impact on the entire region. But the situation can be coped with only if a wide range of states are involved, especially EU countries and the USA. A lot depends on success in the talks on Syria. If they manage to agree on Syria, a field will be created for mutual contacts in the future. 

- How will the exacerbation of relations between the two biggest oil states reflect on global oil prices? 

- There was a slight rise in the first days of confrontation but then the prices went down again. Oil prices will not depend on the current situation as long as there is no obvious or hidden threat to oil export from the Gulf. The world's economic development has a greater influence on oil pricing. No significant price rise is to be expected. In all likelihood, the prices will be fluctuating around the current level. The dumping measures taken by Saudi Arabia are not good for country itself because the situation in the Saudi economy is not as favourable as it was five or six years ago.

TEHRAN SET FREE

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has announced that Iran has taken all the necessary steps to begin the implementation of the accords with six world powers relating to the nuclear programme issue. 

The IAEA inspectors, who visited the Iranian nuclear facilities, have confirmed that Iran has met all its commitments, the agency's director general, Fukiya Amano, announced. 

Immediately after that, US Secretary of State John Kerry and the head of European diplomacy [High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy] Federica Mogherini announced the partial lifting of the international, unilateral sanctions on Iran. According to an RBK [Rosbusinessconsalting] report the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has reported that from 16 January the ban has been lifted on third countries doing business in Iran or with Iranian companies.

A similar ban has been lifted on foreign branches of American corporations. The Iran-related trade embargo on American enterprises remains in force. True, it has been scaled down somewhat. Washington is permitting exports to Iran of spare parts for civilian airliners and the import of Iranian produce and handicraft items.

From 16 January the restrictions on Iran have also been eliminated, and the European Union - Europe will no longer apply the oil embargo and will permit financial transactions with Iranian companies and banks.

One reservation here is that not all the sanctions on Iran are being lifted, but precisely those linked with the nuclear issue. Both America and the EU are retaining the ban on arms sales to Iran, and those connected with the fact that Iran has supported individuals and organisations suspected of terrorism and violations of human rights. According to the assessment of the lawyers Maya Lester and Michael O'Kane, who specialise in sanctions, the EU has taken 64 individuals and 373 organisations off the list of sanctions, while 29 individuals and 94 organisations remain on the list. But on 17 January, the American OFAC even introduced new sanctions on Iran: 11 companies and individuals connected with the missile programme have been subjected to various bans and restrictions. 

For Iran the lifting of the sanctions means first and foremost two pleasant things.

Firstly, Iran will gain access to its financial assets which have been frozen. According to the World Bank, approximately 107bn dollars in assets are currently frozen, mainly in Western banks. This is largely money that Iran received from oil exports. After the sanctions have been lifted, Iran will immediately be able to gain access to 29bn dollars.

Secondly, Iran will be able to step up its oil supplies. Last year, Iran's Petroleum Minister Bijan Namdar Zangeneh suggested that the country will immediately be capable of exporting 500,000 barrels of oil per day. Other Iranian officials and businessmen predict that exports will rise to 1m barrels per day in the first seven months and return to the pre-sanctions' level of 3.4m barrels per day within 12 months.

On 16 January, it was also learned that Tehran had agreed to free five US citizens. In exchange Washington freed seven Iranians who were accused of or suspected of attempting to obtain dual purpose goods.

The talks on the prisoner swap had been conducted separately in Geneva and were not connected with the Iranian nuclear programme. The success of these talks underlined yet again the effectiveness of American-Iranian dialogue.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani thanked Allah and the country's "patient people" for the lifting of the international sanctions. In his twitter Rouhani referred to the nuclear deal as a "glorious victory" too. He also stated that the lifting of economic and financial sanctions will promote the growth of the country's economy and appealed for fresh efforts to improve it.

Speaking to the parliament, Rouhani stated that Iran will gain access to the international banking system (joining the SWIFT transaction system) and to direct foreign investments.

Many politicians congratulated Iran on the lifting of sanctions. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon approved the efforts of all sides to meet the commitments agreed upon and promised to render assistance in the future, Reuters reported. US Secretary of State John Kerry referred to the deal as the start of world security.

The Russian Foreign Ministry welcomed the lifting of the sanctions after noting the key role played by Russia in creating the conditions for cooperation between the "six" and Iran. The British Foreign and Commonwealth secretary [Philip Hammond] noted his own contribution and also the new opportunities for business. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius also welcomed the agreement, noting that France would strictly keep track of it to ensure that it is observed.

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry also welcomed the lifting of sanctions.

"We congratulate the friendly people of Iran on this achievement and express the conviction that this positive process will be an additional stimulus to the extensive development of a mutually advantageous partnership between Azerbaijan and Iran," it notes in the Foreign Ministry statement.