Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Vladimir Sazhin, a senior researcher of the Institute of Oriental Studies
Now, speaking quite frankly, Iran cannot make some serious compromises in its position
concerning the nuclear issue, because there is a serious struggle within the Iranian elite.
Therefore, I think this struggle will continue till the elections,
and only after the presidential elections in Iran may some stabilization occur
(I am not talking about a complete stabilization).
It will let the new authorities of the country, I mean, the executive ones,
make more definite steps towards the Group of Six.
This point is very important.
Especially, you know that since the formal entry of the embargo into force on July 1, 2012,
the Iranians have taken some very serious steps.
Quite powerful air-missile exercises began on July 2; these exercises were codenamed "Great Prophet 7."
They will last three days, that is, till tomorrow.
As far as we know from the media, all of the Iranian missile systems will be engaged in these exercises.
The most interesting fact is that the Iranians
have supposedly prepared the layouts of the U.S. military bases in their territory;
the missiles will actually be launched there.
It is a measure of force.
Moreover, as far as I know, the Iranian Majlis or, more precisely,
the Committee on Security and International Affairs, has prepared a bill on closing the Hormuz Strait,
if the situation with the oil embargo announced by the EU threatens the interests of Iran.
The United States and Britain announced that this would mean a declaration of war almost at the same time.
Could the internal situation in Iran provoke an increase of internal discontent in the country?
Of course. Although the sanctions formally took effect on July 1 but...
Why did they need July 1, although the EU agreed on this on January 23?
The reason is that many European companies have contracts with Iran,
and the last contract ended just on July 1,
and none of these Western companies has signed new contracts with Iran.
Therefore, there was such a date.
Of course, by my count, Iran could lose about $20 billion per year due to the fact
that the oil from Iran will not be supplied.
If we add to this a very large reduction in the purchases of crude oil
by the main consumers of Iranian oil in Southeast Asia (I am referring to South Korea, China, Japan, etc.),
this figure will increase even more.
Of course, it is not a disaster for the Iranian economy, which is generally a developed one,
but it's a big failure.
I have repeatedly said a dollar was worth 11,000 Iranian reals in November,
and in April it was worth 22,000, that is, the fall was twofold.
Inflation, according to the official data, is currently about 22%, although,
according to unofficial estimates, even Iranian economists say that it is up to 40%,
and Western sources say it is even up to 60%.
Prices are dramatically rising.
Bread prices, for example, rose by 70% in a few weeks.
This situation, of course, causes discontent in the country, not only among its population,
but even among the ruling elites.
Since last December, when the talk about the oil embargo started,
the deputies of the Majlis accused President Ahmadinejad of bringing the country to this situation;
this was even before the oil embargo.
So, of course, the reforms of Ahmadinejad that began some time ago,
these economic reforms have created a negative situation.
Although they were generally positive for the future of Iran,
but it was also a great shock to the very foundations of the Iranian economy,
which have existed for many years.
But these sanctions
(we know that there are sanctions of the UN Security Council which are four resolutions,
there are also sanctions of the United States, and there are the EU sanctions;
I'm talking about the latest sanctions, I mean the banking ones,
the prohibition of the insurance of tankers carrying Iranian oil, and the oil embargo)
- all of this was quite shocking for the Iranian economy.
Alexander Iskandaryan, the director of the Caucasus Institute
The situation around Iran has not been very safe for Iran for a long time.
From Afghanistan through Pakistan to Gulf countries and the Saudis,
with whom they have never been successful partners, and so on -
Iran has already got used to existing amongst these countries,
and it has certain mechanisms of both foreign policy and economy
(we are talking about a very particular type of economy close to autarchy)
which Iran uses in order to learn somehow how to exist in this mode.
The situation with the threat of a serious strike against Iran is not unambiguous.
It seems to me that, at least in a short run,
that is, before the election and the change of president of the United States,
and probably before the elections in Iran, it seems very unlikely that Iran will be attacked.
If it is just a missile attack, the United States will not manage to solve any serious problems by it.
And the problems that may arise, I think, are too serious for such a decision by the Americans.
I mean Americans, not Israelis, it's still not the same thing.
It is extremely difficult for me to imagine the apocalypse of a land invasion of Iran.
It is also quite difficult to imagine that the situation around Iran
will aggravate before a resolution of the Syrian issue.
As for the question on the reaction of people in Armenia to the events in the neighboring countries,
I can say they are very worried about it.
It is not very typical for our country.
Iran supplies about 30% of our exports, including transit trade.
In fact, Iran is informally one of the guarantors of the situation in the South Caucasus.
Iran is one of our two neighbors with which the border is open.
And Iran is a country with which Armenia has excellent economic relations,
taking into account the specifics of the Iranian model with their closed market,
and very good political relations.