Special By By Paul Iddon Jun 21, 2014 in Politics Iran has been an essential country to follow in the last few months and years. With ongoing negotiations about its nuclear program and Iran's increasing involvement in the Middle East region this seems truer now than it has been for quite some time. His pieces can be read on He was kind enough to discuss these matters with me. i) First of all could you tell us a little bit about yourself and your background? I am originally from the Islamic Republic of Iran and Syria. Currently, I am a US citizen. I am a Harvard scholar, I serve on the board of Harvard International Review and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. ii) There has been considerable hype over the ongoing nuclear negotiations brokered between Tehran and Washington last year. As an Iranian-Syrian yourself do you think Obama administration and the international community in general were right not to even broach the issue of human rights violations in Iran with their Iranian negotiating partners? Geo-politically, strategically, and economically speaking, I believe that the international community and Obama's administration hold the view that human rights issue would have complicated the nuclear negotiations or scuttled the whole process. Secondly, human rights are not on the top of US or other Western countries' foreign policy agenda toward the Islamic Republic. Their national and economic interests precede the situation of human rights in Iran (take Saudi-West relations as another example). In addition, the flow of oil and stability of oil market are more paramount for Obama's administration and the international community than human rights. From my perspective, human rights should have been included in the nuclear negotiations. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, pictured during a meeting in Tehran, on June 15, 2014 Atta Kenare, AFP iii) Furthermore do you feel the possibility of U.S./Iran cooperation against ISIS in Iraq is mostly speculation or a real possibility? As you know such cooperation wouldn't be unprecedented when one takes into account the military cooperation between Tehran and Washington undertook against the Taliban in Herat Afghanistan back in 2001. It is possible. However, there is significant pressure from US congress and influential players in Washington that US should not cooperate with Iran and IRGC [Islamic Republic Guard Corps]. They believe Iran will be emboldened and would gain legitimacy by this move and it would be more assertive in pursuing its regional hegemonic ambitions. iv) Would you say the present aforementioned crisis in Iraq could pose a strategic hindrance to broader Iranian interests in the region such as its continued support for the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and the Hezbollah party and militia in Lebanon? In a long-term, the Islamic Republic's popularity in the Arab population, particularly among the Sunni faction, will be significantly impacted. Strategically speaking, Iran views Syria as a zero-sum game, meaning that Assad has to stay in power, otherwise Tehran's regional influence will be fundamentally affected. So far, Iran is still prevailing in Syria, but this might change in a long-term. Iraqis living in Iran hold posters bearing portraits of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani (left) and Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (right) at a rally in Tehran on June 20, 2014 Atta Kenare, AFP v) Do you suspect that the drastically differing views held on the role the Shiite clergy should play in the political process between the Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani of Iraq will become more important and more pressingly relevant to developments in both Iran and Iraq in the next few years? Actually, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei has isolated some powerful clerics in the city of Qum. He's excluded them from being members of his Office of the Supreme Leader. He views them as a challenge to his religious and divine power. On the other hand, generally speaking, Ayatollah Ali Sistani is less engaged in politics. To some extent, he believes in separation of mosque and state. But, Ayatollah Khamenei does not see any separation between politics and religion. He is the divine leader and commander in chief of IRGC simultaneously. vi) And finally, do you think a complete rapprochement and restoration of relations between the United States and the regime in Iran would be a positive development for the world? I don't believe so. The reason I am saying this is that the underlying and major tension between the US and Islamic Republic is not the nuclear issue. Even if a final nuclear deal is reached, tensions will continue. The underlying tension is Iran's stance toward Israel and its regional policies. Majid Rafizadeh is a political scientist who has been following the Iranian situation for quite some time. He has closely analyzed in his numerous writings and columns the Iranian human rights situation and its role in the region in relation to its strong support of Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria and the Hezbollah organization in Lebanon.His pieces can be read on Al Arabiya and The Huffington Post and he can be followed on Twitter @majidrafizadeh He was kind enough to discuss these matters with me.I am originally from the Islamic Republic of Iran and Syria. Currently, I am a US citizen. I am a Harvard scholar, I serve on the board of Harvard International Review and president of the International American Council on the Middle East.Geo-politically, strategically, and economically speaking, I believe that the international community and Obama's administration hold the view that human rights issue would have complicated the nuclear negotiations or scuttled the whole process.Secondly, human rights are not on the top of US or other Western countries' foreign policy agenda toward the Islamic Republic. Their national and economic interests precede the situation of human rights in Iran (take Saudi-West relations as another example).In addition, the flow of oil and stability of oil market are more paramount for Obama's administration and the international community than human rights. From my perspective, human rights should have been included in the nuclear negotiations.It is possible. However, there is significant pressure from US congress and influential players in Washington that US should not cooperate with Iran and IRGC [Islamic Republic Guard Corps]. They believe Iran will be emboldened and would gain legitimacy by this move and it would be more assertive in pursuing its regional hegemonic ambitions.In a long-term, the Islamic Republic's popularity in the Arab population, particularly among the Sunni faction, will be significantly impacted. Strategically speaking, Iran views Syria as a zero-sum game, meaning that Assad has to stay in power, otherwise Tehran's regional influence will be fundamentally affected. So far, Iran is still prevailing in Syria, but this might change in a long-term.Actually, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei has isolated some powerful clerics in the city of Qum. He's excluded them from being members of his Office of the Supreme Leader. He views them as a challenge to his religious and divine power. On the other hand, generally speaking, Ayatollah Ali Sistani is less engaged in politics. To some extent, he believes in separation of mosque and state. But, Ayatollah Khamenei does not see any separation between politics and religion. He is the divine leader and commander in chief of IRGC simultaneously.I don't believe so. The reason I am saying this is that the underlying and major tension between the US and Islamic Republic is not the nuclear issue. Even if a final nuclear deal is reached, tensions will continue. The underlying tension is Iran's stance toward Israel and its regional policies. More about Iran, Syria, Iraq, Majid Rafizadeh, Iran nuclear talks Iran Syria Iraq Majid Rafizadeh Iran nuclear talks Ali khamenei Ayatollah Sistani Irgc