Iran elections, potential Israeli war on Lebanon: Exclusive interview

Posted on June 25, 2024 by uprootedpalestinians

June 24, 2024

Mr. Saman Niyazi, the head of Dr. Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf’s International Peace Headquarters and an official in the presidential candidate’s campaign. (Al Mayadeen English)

An Interview with Mr. Saman Niyazi, an official from the campaign of Iranian presidential candidate Dr. Mohammad Ghalibaf, sheds light on a range of topics including the Iranian elections, foreign policy, and the potential Israeli aggression on Lebanon.

The presidential elections in the Islamic Republic of Iran are scheduled to take place on the 28th of this month, while the competition for office among the six qualified candidates is becoming more intense by the day.

As the world sets its eyes on the country in anticipation of who would become the new president, no matter who chairs the high office, the principles guiding Iran since the victory of the Islamic Revolution in 1979 remain at the core of its policy, both domestic and foreign.

Covering the elections live from Tehran, Al Mayadeen English interviewed Mr. Saman Niyazi, who is currently the head of Dr. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf’s International Peace Headquarters and an official in his campaign.

A range of topics were discussed, including the latest developments in the electoral race, the nuclear agreement, Iran’s foreign policy, the developments in the region, and the potential war on Lebanon.

Jalili pulling out of the race?

The Iranian nation expects a “strong man to assume” the presidency, said Mr. Niyazi, who also served previously as the deputy assistant to the president in pursuit of justice and freedoms during the term of late President Ebrahim Raisi.

“This … is also the aim of all conservative factions to bring forth a strong, dynamic person who will enhance Iran’s position in the region and the world,” he continued.

According to the most recent polls, two of the top three contenders today are “conservatives” Dr. Ghalibaf and Dr. Saeed Jalili. This puts them against one “reformist” candidate Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian. The split in votes is expected to affect the chances of a first-round win, and a run-off election is expected to take place on July 5.

In that context, and given many of the shared objectives among the conservative candidates, Mr. Niyazi suggested that, based on the available data, and his personal analysis, Dr. Jalili could pull out of the race in favor of Dr. Ghalibaf.

“I foresee a higher likelihood of Mr. Jalili withdrawing in favor of Mr. Ghalibaf rather than vice versa.”

Ghalibaf and the JCPOA

The nuclear agreement between Iran and the Western powers is one of the main issues today dividing both candidates and the voters.

Mr. Niyazi confirmed that the “nuclear agreement is a complex matter” today in the Islamic Republic that requires a lengthy assessment. However, contrary to unending Western reports suggesting that all “conservatives” are against the JCPOA, Niyazi explained that for Dr. Ghalibaf, the only problem with the deal is with regard to its implementation.

“The previous government, Mr. Rouhani’s administration, signed an important international agreement with the P5+1 group,” referring to the US, the UK, France, Russia, China and Germany. The group is now called the P4+1 after the US under Donald Trump’s administration unilaterally withdrew from the UN-backed agreement.

“We asked our colleagues, Why should Iran take the initiative to comply with steps before the P5+1 group and the United States? … . Why shouldn’t the steps be reciprocal? Why should we always take the initiative to gain the trust of the other party? This is the issue.”

He stressed that this conduct “does not match the dignity and status of the great Iranian people.”

Mr. Niyazi recalled how later President Raisi approached the issue.

“When Mr. Raisi assumed the presidency, he declared that the nuclear agreement is an important international document for us. We respect this international document, but we will negotiate … from a position of pride and equality” with the P4+1.” Therefore, Mr. Raisi’s administration negotiated [from a] position [of power] with the Western countries” and did not “offer any initiatives beyond this agreement.”

He added that the “main reason for the halt in nuclear negotiations is due to the Western countries’ demands for more from the Islamic Republic of Iran, which did not align with the dignity … of the Iranian people. Therefore, the negotiations stopped.”

‘A nuclear agreement from a position of power’

Former President Hassan Rouhani has been criticized for focusing most of his efforts on landing the nuclear deal with Western countries and improving Iran’s ties with them, despite their long history of not carrying out their commitments, meanwhile neglecting to a large extent expanding relations with Iran’s neighbors and the region.

Mr. Niyazi pointed out that “[Late President] Raisi did not heavily focus or link the country’s affairs to this agreement (JCPOA), but turned towards the East, signing many agreements as part of a policy of developing relations with neighboring countries” which had been “neglected by Mr. Rouhani’s administration.”

Related News

Everyone saw the positive impact of late President Raisi’s work, he said, expressing that Dr. Ghalibaf shares these views and would pursue a similar policy.

The collective West has been working tirelessly for decades to divide the region as part of its hegemonic agenda, eyeing its countries’ resources and wealth. Between inciting wars and disputes, both directly and indirectly, the West was the only party set to gain from these divisions.

To foil these imperialistic desires, the Islamic Republic of Iran always opted to engage with its region on the basis of respect, diplomacy, common grounds, and shared interests.

“The main reason behind the arrogance and dominance of the major Western powers and the United States” is due to the great potential and resources in our region. And neglecting “rising powers and organizations” in the region has amplified this dominance, Mr. Niyazi continued.

“Therefore, martyr Mr. Raisi aimed to gather these potentials and revive the points and centers of power in the region,” especially with regards to Resistance powers “against Western hegemony and dominance.”

Turning East is a principled decision

In the past few years during late President Raisi’s term, the Islamic Republic had made pivotal shifts concerning its foreign relations, prioritizing stronger ties with its neighbors and countries that it shares common values and objectives with.

Asked whether Iran’s policy toward strengthening ties with regional countries and nations it shares common interests with is mainly a means to circumvent Western sanctions, Mr. Niyazi emphasized that “this [policy] holds economic and social goals based on historical partnerships,” dismissing that Iran’s current path is circumstantial.

He pointed out that joining organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS, which Iran became a member of during late President Raisi’s term, “led to reduced tensions and increased stability in the region … leading hegemonic powers to reconsider their stance toward the region’s powers.”

“Therefore, the primary goal of turning East is rooted in these fundamental objectives, which are considered far more important than circumventing sanctions.

Ghalibaf has held many top public offices in the country throughout the past decades. He was a field commander during the Sacred Defense period in the war against the former Iraqi regime, former chief of police, former commander of the IRGC Air Force, and previously the Mayor of Tehran before being elected as speaker of parliament in 2020.

Asked about Dr. Ghalibaf’s campaign, Mr. Niyazi pointed out, “Dr. Ghalibaf has a long record of holding [official] positions and executive experiences in the country.”

“He is now the Speaker of Parliament, meaning he heads one of the three main authorities, which is the legislative authority. This means that Dr. Ghalibaf has full supervision and knowledge of the country’s problems, foreign policy, and all executive matters. He knows the weaknesses and strengths in the country and has full oversight,” he said, expressing confidence that the candidate “has great competence and possesses the utmost potential to awaken the powers within the youth and the competencies that can elevate the Islamic Republic of Iran to peaks of pride and honor.”

An Israeli war on Lebanon means a destructive response from Hezbollah

As the Israeli genocide in Gaza nears its nine-month mark, the situation in the region seems closer than ever to a regional war. In the past weeks, the Israeli occupation has released several threats of war against Lebanon, while Western media has begun discussing an Israeli aggression on Lebanon, some even suggesting it could happen within a month.

Hezbollah responded by warning “Israel” and its partner, the United States, from committing any foolishness, with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah vowing that, in case a war was imposed on Lebanon, the Resistance would fight it “without any restraints or limits.”

Since the rise of Resistance powers in the region, which have grown into the Resistance Axis, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been their main backer, supporter, and advocate. This resulted in decades-long inhumane sanctions against Iran.

Commenting on the recent developments, Mr. Niyazi stressed that Dr. Ghalibaf, regardless of the ongoing elections, would definitely take a position on the matter as the speaker of the parliament. “The Islamic Republic of Iran and its senior officials will take explicit and clear stances, as in the past … supporting Lebanon and the Resistance Axis.”

He also underlined Sayyed Nasrallah’s statement, saying, “If [the Israeli] entity commits such foolishness, it will face a destructive response as announced by the Secretary-General [of Hezbollah], who stated that Hezbollah possesses the field and military capability to teach this entity a lesson it would not forget.”

“Whenever this entity has carried out an aggression, whether by targeting Hezbollah leaders, Hezbollah headquarters, or Lebanese border villages, it has received a direct, decisive, and shocking response” from the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon. “This demonstrates Hezbollah’s complete and significant capability to deal with this threat,” Niyazi said, adding that “the Lebanese people are a resistant and brave people.”

Operation True Promise a ‘political’ response, not military

Mr. Niyazi confirmed that, “the world is witnessing day by day the unveiling of new deterrent weapons against this entity,” referring to weapons recently introduced by members of the Resistance Axis, especially Hezbollah in this case. “And of course, [“Israel”] has received crushing blows, significant blows that have shattered its military and political dominance, starting with Operation Al-Aqsa Flood,” which was carried out by the Palestinian Resistance, and “which undermined its (Israeli) security and military dominance.”

On the occupation entity’s declining power, he recalled Iran’s retaliation for the Israeli attack on the Islamic Repubclic’s consulate in Syria, which led to the martyrdom of several IRGC senior officials.

“The Islamic Republic’s response to this crime was not a military response but a political one,” he noted. “We informed everyone that Iranian drones were on their way to the entity. Despite this, despite all the countries supporting this illegitimate entity gathering to intercept the Iranian drones and missiles … they failed to prevent them from reaching their targets.”

“This resulted in the entity’s capabilities and image falling into ridicule.”

On whether Iran would get involved in any way in case a war was launched on Lebanon, Mr. Niyazi said that the Islamic Republic “will take all measures to respond to this aggression and support the Lebanese people,” without further elaborating on what steps Iran could take.

However, regarding Iranian military involvement, he said that such a decision would be “linked to the military leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran. They are the ones who will take the decision in this regard, but I believe that Hezbollah alone is capable of decisively responding to any foolishness from this entity.”