Kyiv strengthens relations with Tehran

The president of a state referred to by the United States as one of three countries forming an ‘axis of evil’ has just spent two days in Ukraine. The president of a troubled state in which religious dogmas and principles have so far been in conflict with everything secular. The Head of a country offended by Kyiv for breaking what was for it an important contract.

October 16 marked the first official visit to Ukraine in the history of Ukrainian-Iranian relations by the Iranian president Seyed Mohammad Khatami. He turned up, possibly, not at the best time. That is to say American and British experts are presently looking in our country for possible evidence of the illegal sales of military equipment to Iraq. For more than twenty years already (since the Islamic revolution of 1979) the United States has not considered Iran a friendly country. The American Minister for Defense Donald Rumsfeld recently called Tehran one of the main potential proliferators of nuclear weapons. While Tehran does not yet have any, Washington doesn’t doubt that at the first opportunity Iran will find a way to make one. Not without reason Americans reacted badly in 1998 to the possible participation of the Ukrainian Turboatom factory in a project to build reactors at a Nuclear Power station in the Iranian town of Bushehr. As soon as the American administration found out about it, American Secretary of State Madeleine Albright flew to Kyiv, and Ukrainian leader Leonid Kuchma was compelled to announce that Ukraine would not take part in the Bushehr project. At that time Russia paid no attention to American peremptory shouts, as they did not intend to turn down the Bushehr agreement.

Tehran was offended by Kyiv’s actions. It seemed that it would be a long time before relations would resume. However, they did recommence and the countries even managed to successfully accomplish the An-140 joint airplane-building project. Leonid Kuchma noted that during their last meeting both sides talked of the possibility of broadening cooperation in this sphere. “We have agreed not to stop on An-140, but to move in the direction of building a consortium, in which others may be invited to participate”, stated the Ukrainian President. Apart from this, Kyiv hopes to collaborate with Iran in the energy field. This is not a new idea. Even five years ago the sides discussed the question of transporting oil across the territory of Ukraine to Western Europe. They even spoke of a so- called Iran-Turkmenistan-Ukraine triangle. It seems that today they have decided to leave this project aside. The oil idea originating from the Ukrainian side obviously did not find support in Iranian political and business circles. The Iranian minister of Foreign Affairs Kamal Kharrazi during his last visit to Kyiv announced that before talking about the realization of oil initiatives, its technical-economical basis should be conveyed. Of course the building of an oil pipe line across the Transcaucases, and then at the bottom of the Black Sea could prove to be simply unprofitable: the outlay for its construction could exceed potential profits several times over. All the more as Ukraine so far cannot cope with the realization of the other Odessa- Brody oil project. In that case, is it worth throwing out loud declarations about new oil lines? Leonid Kuchma, however, announced that at the meeting with Khatami the Ukrainian side had raised the question about transportation of gas via Ukraine to Western Europe. Khatami’s answers to all the Ukrainian leader’s suggestions were not very expressive: “In full support of his colleague”. Incidentally, Ukraine is similarly striving for collaboration with Iran in the nuclear sphere. Kuchma noted that here the topic was not the resumption of Bushehr. “You know why we are not there,” he said. This time Kyiv wants to work within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The details of new cooperation unfortunately, have not yet been published, but undoubtedly many countries would be interested in them. First of all the US.

It is possible to talk for a long time about the assertion of national interests, but not take into consideration the actual international situation of Ukraine. Against a background of the anti-terrorist campaign headed by Washington, as well as the Kolchuha uncertainty, the demonstrated cooperation between Kyiv and Tehran may not be taken as a joke by the Americans. Washington believes that the Iranian fundamentalist circles are one of the main financiers of terrorist groups, active in the Middle East and organizing almost daily terrorist acts in Israel. Will Ukraine be able to provide an alibi for itself? In principle such possibilities exist. Firstly, the Khatami visit was planned long before the Americans declared Iran to be an axis of evil. Secondly, Khatami represents a reformatory wing of political thought in Iran (unlike religious Iranian leader yatollah Ali Khamenei, a follower of conservative dogma). In the west Khatami is valued as the most progressive politician in Iran for the last twenty years. That is to say with his presidency came warmer relations between Tehran and London, Paris, and Berlin. In particular Khatami became the initiator of the declaration of the ‘twenty-first century, as the century of the dialog of civilizations’ that was approved at the General Assembly of the UN. Khatami, incidentally, is frequently compared with the first and last president of the USSR, calling the Iranian leader the ‘Iranian Gorbachov’. Thirdly, Iran has exerted considerable effort in the fight against terrorism. Tehran condemned the terrorist act in America on September 11, not recognizing the Afghan government movement, the Taliban. The country has continued to detain al Qaeda fighters fleeing from Afghanistan handing them over to their country of origin.

One of the main things under discussion between Leonid Kuchma and Khatami is the question of possible military action by the United States against Iraq. The first question journalists posed to the president concerned exactly the future of Baghdad. Leonid Kuchma tactfully gave the right to answer first to his Iranian colleague. Although at the beginning of the eighties Iran suffered the aggression of Saddam Hussein (in the Iran-Iraq war), today Tehran insists on a peaceful decision to the Iraqi dilemma. “The use of force without the permission of international organizations will destroy stability and peace in many countries,” noted Khatami. “Who could be against peace? We know what war is like, therefore Ukraine is for the solution of any problem by means of peace,” repeated his colleague Leonid Kuchma.

Ukrainian-Iranian relations have endured Bushehr, and it seems that they will change with circumstances many more times, irrespective of what Kyiv and Tehran want. Can we overcome this influence? Political will or declaration alone is not enough for this.