Introduction:
Diplomacy and noises in international relations are manifested differently and sometimes the gestures or silence becomes more meaningful than others. What can not avoid notice here is that Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi did not say a word about Kashmir which has occurred to international concern few days ago. On the background of continuous historical hassles and regional disputes, such policy going with Raisi’s line, or rather lack of it, show us how delicately the situation of Iran lies. The essay investigates the Raisi’s silence on the matter of Kashmir for many nuanced reasons, where investors Iran’s foreign policy and the fact that where Raisi poses his strategic considerations are the ones that guides the latter’s posturing.
Table of Contents
Understanding Iran’s Foreign Policy Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi:
For an Iranian leader unfamiliar with addressing the Kashmir issue, a brief research on the trajectory of Iranian foreign policy is necessary. Traditionally Iran with the doctrine of non-interference and reliance on the principles of sovereignty and non-alignment asked to other nations s stay out of their internal issues. This strategy did not just help Iran to keep its course afloat, but also to escape the quagmires of foreign conflicts. Nevertheless, more complex thing is the internal political situation of Iran considering the regional actors role and geo-political agenda.
Iran’s Position in the Middle East:Iran’s Position in the Middle East Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi :
Having been located at the marasta of the Middle East, Iran holds a unique vantage in the region’s geometric scenery. As a nation with multi-faced relations involving both India and Pakistan, Iran therefore finds itself painstakingly sitting on the wall and watching the developments unfold in the legacy of Kashmir conflict. On the representing hand, Iran has rich historical and economic links with India especially on power trade side. In contrast to it, Pakistan plays a decisive role in Iran’s core plans, where both countries feel united toward regional peace and counter-terrorism endeavors.
The Kashmir Conundrum Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi :
Thus, this diplomatic challenge becomes a part of the Iranian diplomacy with respect to the Kashmir issue. The Kashmir region, as the geographical position of India-Pakistan conflict area, has been the issue for a long time of both claiming side for the ownership. Owing to the old-enmities and geo-political sensitivity surrounding Kashmir, any misjudgement by Iran on this matter can jeopardize its whole effort to navigate through a tricky relationship with India and Pakistan, where it must handle Pakistan’s sensitivity to any statement that deviates from Kashmir issue.
Ebrahim Raisi’s Diplomatic Tightrope:
Upon this tricky circumstances, avoiding answer to Kashmir by President Raisi can be seen as a tactical act which is aimed at preventing destruction of delicate balance between India and Pakistan by Iran. Through his silence in bringing about a potential resolution, this assures that neither side is taken off in the middle nor Iran would still stand to be a neutral peacekeeper of the region. The Iranians are undeniably walking a diplomatic tightrope, as none of them want to alienate their Western partners, however, a nuanced approach they take behind the scenes is governed by their strategic imperatives and geopolitical realities.
Iran’s Economic Interests:
Apart from just diplomacy, Iran’s economic interests are charged in enacting he stance on Kashmir also. India takes a prominent place for Iran among its Iranian trading partners, especially in the energy sector where India imports it major portion of oil from Iran. A clear stance of solidarity with Pakistan over Kashmir could provoke the break up of economic relations with India, which is therefore the threat to the economic interests of Iran on the economic side. So, decisions of President Raisi about his country’s stance on Kashmir issue should carefully move within limit of economy and keep intact of big Iranian strategic objectives.
Humanitarian Concerns:
It should be mentioned that the President keeping silence towards the Kashmir situation does not always mean he is not much concerned or not aware of the hardships of the Kashmiri people. As a result, Iranian leaders who have no relationship with Geneva, may be secretly negotiating to bring about the discourse and a peaceful agreement, concerning the situation in Kashmir. Iran has so far been one of the few countries that has affirmed this position, as they diplomatically posited a dialogue based solution to the Kashmir problem, based on mutual respect and refraining from disregarding the legitimate rights of all parties involved. Hence, even though a silent Raisi might sound to some like a tactic, we should not deduce that his commitment to humanitarian principles and conflict resolution is in the slightest.
Conclusion:
This silence confirms the subtleties of the particular situation which have to be perceived and negotiated in favor of diplomatic connection between Iran, India and Pakistan. In addition, considering the geopolitical tensions that have been thriving in the area, Ebrahim Razis approach is reflective of the many complexities and challenges that Iran faces as it strides in its foreign policy choices. In addition to his ambition to pose the status quo in Kashmir, Raisi has also witnessed the strategic silence on Kashmir an effective move to achieve national interests, to safeguard its economic interdependencies and to maneuver with the web of intense regional rivalries. Nevertheless, the diplomatic shell conceals a sophisticated style that Iran takes into account geopolitical parameters, humanitarian anxieties, and the strategic assessments. With rising prominence of Iran in global politics under President Raisi, the unique approach of Raisi government towards Kashmir demands special focus for the scholars to study how complicated the situation become nowadays and how the rivalries among different countries become so important.
