On July 21, 2020, Mr. Mustafa al-Kadhimi, the Iraqi prime minister, met with the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution. Ayatollah Khamenei’s statements in this meeting contained very important and strategic points ranging from an emphasis on the independence and the territorial integrity of Iraq and support for the Iraqi government to the issue of the assassination of Martyr Soleimani in that country and the necessity to expel the Americans from the region.
For this reason, Khamenei.ir has examined the different aspects of this meeting through an interview with Mr. Hassan Kadhimi Qomi, the first ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Iraq after the overthrow of the Ba’athist government of Saddam. In this interview, as well as analyzing al-Kadhimi's meeting with Imam Khamenei, he raises very important and interesting points about the relations between Iran and Iraq, the situation of the camp of Resistance, and the expulsion of the Americans from the region:
A strategic meeting
The trip that the Iraqi high-ranking political, economic and military delegation made to Iran, was really meaningful and significant, considering the fact that it took place under special circumstances and that it lasted for a short period of time. Among the meetings that foreign prime ministers have had with the Supreme Leader, the recent one enjoyed special characteristics. In fact, this meeting was extraordinarily important and strategic as it was actually a clarification of the Islamic Republic’s position regarding Iraq, the Iraqi government and the camp of Resistance. The meeting also contained many messages for the U.S. In fact, the Islamic Republic’s charter of foreign policies was completely visible in the statements of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution. For this reason, there is no ambiguity in the positions of the Islamic Republic regarding Iraq and it could be said that it was one of the most historic meetings of an Iraqi prime minister.
Compared to the meetings that the other prime ministers of Iraq had with the Supreme Leader, this meeting enjoyed more important points and characteristics. All those meetings were good ones, but the recent one was extraordinarily important considering the special circumstances and the statements that His Eminence made. This meeting can be analyzed in its different aspects:
1. Iran’s support for a safe and independent Iraq pivoting around national authority
At the meeting, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution stressed the major policies of the Islamic Republic towards Iraq. A policy which revolves around the aspiration of the Islamic Republic of Iran to build a stable, safe, prospering and independent Iraq with an independent and dignified national authority. The Islamic Republic will benefit from the establishment of such an Iraq. The people of Iraq will benefit from it as well and the stability and security of the region depend on the existence of such an Iraq. The Islamic Republic of Iran stood alongside the people of Iraq and the government that is based on the votes of the people in order to help build such an Iraq. This is what the Islamic Republic’s performance sheet corroborates it. Under all circumstances – in particular under difficult and critical circumstances: whether during the time when Iraq had been occupied or during the time when the takfiri groups were laying siege to Iraqi borders and committing acts of terrorism – the only country that stood alongside the people and government of Iraq in a brave, humble and powerful way was the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Not only the Americans but also eastern powers and Arab countries - which claim that Iraq is a part of the Arab community and therefore, should receive help - refused to help. On the contrary, they moved against the Iraqi nation demand. These orientations are headed by Saudi Arabia which is basically opposed to an Iraq with such characteristics. The Saudi Arabian rulers are basically opposed to the existence of an Iraq which enjoys stability, security, prosperity and a political system based on the people’s will – in other words, democracy. This is because there is no democracy and circulation of power in Saudi Arabia. They do not at all allow elections to be held there and if an election is held in Iraq, if there is national authority coupled with security, blossoming, stability and independence, this will be a message for the Saudi Arabian people to express their hatred of a hereditary-monarchic system.
The political system in Saudi Arabia is, unfortunately, a system that stabs the world of Islam in the back today and it has established a bond with the enemies of the world of Islam – the usurping Zionist regime. That is why Saudi Arabia has stood in the opposite front to the people.
2. Cooperation without any interference
Another point that the Supreme Leader stressed in that meeting was that Iran would not interfere in the internal affairs of Iraq. When the Islamic Republic does not allow others to interfere in its domestic affairs, it will not grant itself the permission to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries either; but are offering counsel, giving one’s opinion and expressing one’s willingness to cooperate considered as interference? These are not acts of interference in any way. The Islamic Republic of Iran has precious experience in establishing an independent political system, in ensuring security, in improving its economy, in securing borders and in adopting every other measure.
Warning others about the danger of terrorism and usurpation and giving counsel do not mean interference. The Islamic Republic will not act as an impartial spectator in Iraq. We stay by the side of the people of Iraq as a powerful country and neighbor and we will offer our cooperation, interaction and assistance, but we will not interfere. For this reason, despite all conjectures and analyses about the new Prime Minister of Iraq, the Islamic Republic approved and supported the votes of the people and parliament of Iraq.
The Islamic Republic’s warm reception to Mr. al-Kadhimi and the meeting with the highest-ranking official of that country indicates that the Islamic Republic respects the Iraqi people’s votes and those of any other nation. However, we are not an impartial spectator. This is a country that will be a threat to the Islamic Republic and other regional countries if a dictatorial regime gains power in it. If Iraq is occupied by others, it will be a threat to us. If that country becomes subject to the invasion of terrorist and takfiri groups and if evil and mercenary groups – such as the MEK who committed all kinds of crimes against the Iranian nation – become established there, that will be a threat to us. Therefore, it is natural that the Islamic Republic not allow an occupier to pose a threat to us in that country. However, what is very important is that the interests of the people of Iraq and of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the threats that exist for them are similar. The interests of the Iraqi people are identical to ours. The threat that exists against the people of Iraq is a threat against us as well. The Independence of that country will be to our advantage and vice versa. If that country becomes unsafe, Iran and the region will be unsafe as well. Therefore, we have common interests and threats. As we do not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, we will not allow others to interfere in our internal affairs either.
3. Highlighting the role of al-Hashd al-Sha’bi means there is no need for foreign forces
Another point in the statements of Imam Khamenei was an emphasis on the role of Hash al-Sha’bi. His words on Hashd al-Sha’bi is not merely a message about a single group, rather the message addresses both the Americans and the Iraqi government. In fact, if we witnessed security and stability in fighting against terrorism in Iraq, that was because the Iraqis managed to stand up against the illegitimate will and desires of the occupiers. If Iraq achieved dignity, it was thanks to the presence of the people on social, political and security scenes. The Marja Taqlid (Ayatollah Sistani) issued an edict for fighting against ISIS, stating that anyone gets killed in this war will be a martyr in the way of God. Today, Hashd al-Sha’bi and Resistance groups are basically an inseparable part of the defense strategy of Iraq. This is the reason Imam Khamenei emphasized on the role of Hashd al-Sha’bi; that if you want an independent and safe Iraq with a national authority, you should allow Hashd al-Sha’bi to show its powerful presence. The basic point is that the Iraqi government should provide security to its people and defend them. The army and the armed forces cannot fulfil their mission without the support of the people. Military occupation and interference in Iraq and Afghanistan cannot thrive without the dependence of the defense and security structures and forces of those countries on foreign forces. That is why the Americans are sensitive about Mobilized forces and Hash al-Sha’bi. If Hashd al-Sha’bi can show its presence, there will be no reason for the presence of occupiers and the Americans. The Supreme Leader’s emphasis on Hashd al-Sha’bi signifies an emphasis on the independence of that country and its independence from a foreign force. Therefore, this message reminds the Iraqi Prime Minister that every measure that leads to the weakening of Hashd al-Sha’bi will be dangerous to the national security and interests of Iraq.
4. The Religious Authority provides a source of support for the independence & territorial integrity of Iraq
Another message that the Supreme Leader conveyed concerned Marjayiah (The Religious Authority) – in particular, that of Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Sistani. Since the time when Iraq was occupied until today, religious Marjayiah has proved to be the helmsman in charge of guiding the people of Iraq. Even under the most difficult and most sensitive circumstances, the Marjayiah tried to prevent occupiers from taking advantage of the situation. The Marjayiah guided society in order to prevent certain people from pledging their allegiance to occupiers, to resist takfiri groups such as DAESH and to defend the national authority, independence and territorial integrity of that country. Iraq continues to be a religious society and the Iraqi people’s political points of reference are religious Marjas. Today, the enemy is trying to undermine the position of Marjayiah in order to take away this source of support from the Iraqi nation. That is why the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution emphasised on the importance of the position of the Marjayiah.
5. The Iranian-Iraqi cooperations require leadership structure
Another point in Imam Khamenei's statements was an emphasis on bilateral cooperation between the two countries. In today’s world, there has been no country like the Islamic Republic of Iran that has stood alongside with the people of Iraq in such a sincere, powerful and genuine way and that has defended the achievements of that nation. Of course, Iran will benefit from such cooperation as it will lead to the security and stability of the region. If we look at this cooperation in terms of security and national interests, it is beneficial to the Islamic Republic. In the field of foreign policy, Iraq provides a part of the Islamic Republic’s national security and national interests. Therefore, the cooperation is beneficial from this aspect and we should extend it to economic, political, cultural, social, defensive and security-related areas. This cooperation should not be confined to an interaction between the two governments. The interests of the two nations should become so intermingled that every effort and each will trying to cause a separation between them will fail. We should create a command structure for our bilateral cooperations with neighboring countries – in particular Iraq – and we should incorporate all state, non-governmental and popular resources and we should move in this direction.
6. The US Plan for Iraq has failed
The US, the Zionists and reactionary countries – which are the sworn enemies of Islam, Iran, Islamic Resistance and the discourse of the Islamic Revolution – prevent cooperation on the basis of mutual interests especially in a country like Iraq. With the occupation of Iraq by the Americans in 2003, Mr. Bremer’s mission was to establish a completely American political system with a democratic façade. In fact, the Americans did not want to hold elections until 2008. However, Iraq, Marjayiah and the Islamic Republic stood up against this plan announcing that the political system in Iraq should be established on the basis of the Iraqi people’s demands and votes. The reason why the Americans occupied Iraq was to eternalize their military presence in the region, to Americanize the Iraqis’ defense and security system and to manage the foreign relations of that country. The Americans went to Iraq in order to build an Iraq with such criteria so that Iraq would be the first step in shaping the new American Middle East. Of course, the Iraqi leaders, the religious authority and the Islamic Republic of Iran did not let that happen.
Today, the security, stability and independence of the region equal the security, stability and independence of Iraq. According to expert analysis, when the Islamic Republic says that occupiers should not be in the region, this means the expulsion of the US military occupiers will kick off from Iraq. If the US leaves Iraq, this means that its military presence in the region will be terminated. As Iraq was the first step in forming the new Middle East from an American perspective, today Iraq will be the first step towards expelling the military forces of the US due to the resistance of the camp of Resistance and regional peoples.
7. The US seeks to impose pressure on the Iraqi government
The Americans are lying when they say that they have come to Iraq to ensure the security of Iraq. Seventeen years have passed from the occupation of Iraq and nineteen years have passed from the occupation of Afghanistan. What the Americans did was to create instability, tension and domestic discord. All the US’s efforts in Afghanistan and Syria are focused on diverting the potential of creating a resistance front that could stand up against the occupying Zionist regime. Syria became involved in these matters for several years. In Syria, there was no Islamic Awakening. We cannot refer to the move made in that country as Islamic Awakening. The US, the Zionist regime and its allies pit around 1800 terrorist groups against the people and political system of Syria and by doing so, they destroyed that country. The people of Syria did not want their country to be destroyed. Today, Iraq is suffering from economic problems resulting from a decrease in its oil exports which is due to a decrease in the price of oil. Iraq’s monthly expenses amount to 9.5 billion dollars, but in the present time, its revenues have reached a third of that figure. It is trying to borrow money from the global community, but they will not give it any loan.
Iraq has many expenses to cover, but what is the Americans’ role in helping Iraq? For helping Iraq, the US threatens the Iraqi government saying that if they put pressure on them to withdraw their military forces, they will, in turn, block their money in the oil fund. Contrary to the slogan that they chant, the Americans will not cooperate with any government that holds office in Iraq. By pressuring the Iraqi government, they want to impose their own will. In the present time, the Americans are hampering the cooperation between Iran and Iraq.
When the Supreme Leader said to the Iraqi Prime Minister, “They killed your guest in Iraq”, this means that they violated your national authority. The arrogant U.S. does not at all attach any significance and value to the national authority of countries. The arrogant nature of the US does not let it pay attention to others’ interests. That is why the Americans interfere in other countries' affairs. In the present time, there is an American team in the Central Bank of Iraq which monitors the relations and activities of Iraqi banks and tries to create obstacles and interfere with different excuses. One of the US’s plans is to prevent the increasing interactions between Iran and Iraq. Of course, they create some hurdles, but they will not be able to succeed.
8. The American project to hamper Iran-Iraq relations
On the issue of Iraq’s relations with Iran, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution refers to a certain form of modality for other countries’ relations with Iraq, saying that Iran wishes other countries to cooperate with Iraq as well. The Islamic Republic has no concerns in this regard, but our policy is very clear. A developed Iraq will be to everyone’s benefit. Before Mr. al-Kadhimi’s trip to Iran, they used to claim that he would first travel to Saudi Arabia with the purpose of signing heavy economic contracts in the area of energy, for example. However, such a thing will never happen because countries like the US and Saudi Arabia do not pursue the policy of helping Iraq develop. They do not want Iraq to be built in any way. As for the street uprisings that were staged in Iraq – apart from the legitimate demands of the Iraqi people – the Americans created orientations like the Jokers and by doing so, they suggested different demands and requests to society, none of which is at the top of the people’s demands and interests. They have set up around 1200 NGOs most of which are funded by the US. The Americans have a budget for every mission and project. Their mission is apparently to render services to the people of Iraq, but they are actually opposed to Iraq’s national interests and national authority.
Under such circumstances, it is the Islamic Republic which is offering its assistance in order to present a modality. Of course, unlike the Americans’ slogan, we welcome the idea that other countries should participate in Iraq. Recently, the Americans have presented a new prescription saying that they want to have strong economic relations. Arab countries say this as well, but they specify that the condition to do so is to eliminate Iran from the scene. Then, the Americans say to Arab countries, “If we wish to eliminate Iran from the scene, the condition to do so is to turn the Iraqi-Iranian relations into Iraqi-Arabian relations. Big American investors should invest in that country so as to prevent the Iranian capital from flowing into Iraq.” However, this prescription is a merely a counterfeit excuse in order to hamper the Iraq-Iran relations. They want to take away from them this great source of support. Their goal is not merely to cut off these relations, rather they wish to take away from Iraq this great source of support – that is to say, the Islamic Republic. If this happens, then they will be able to impose everything on Iraq. If the Iraqi army manages to organize itself, there will no more be any excuse to continue their occupation. The US is trying to prevent the formation of a strong government and a defensive and deterrent power acting as a pillar for the country whereas the Islamic Republic has always tried to provide such pillars for Iraq.
9. The consequences of assassinating Gen. Soleimani for the US
As for the issue of hospiticide [killing one’s own guest] during which Martyr Soleimani was assassinated by the Americans while he had gone on a trip to Iraq at the formal invitation of the Iraqi government and which the Americans acknowledged subsequently, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution used the term “killing one’s guests” which has many connotations. First of all, the message of shedding the blood of that great personality was so hard to bear and was so valuable to people that the day after that, the Iraqi parliament ratified the dismissal of American occupiers from Iraq. On that issue, the bubbling of the martyr’s blood was more important than his physical existence. Secondly, no matter if Mr. al-Kadhimi administration holds office or another administration, the US cannot be trusted and relied on. The Americans have shown in all events and developments that they do not honor their commitments. Since 2003 until today, the Americans made certain promises under the most sensitive circumstances, but they did not honor them. That is why the Supreme Leader considers reliance on the US as the opposite direction to Iraq’s national interests.
His Eminence’s statement signifies that the Americans are hypocrites. The US claims to be confronting terrorism, but it assassinated the best anti-terrorist commander of the region. We did not have anyone better than Martyr Soleimani for confronting takfiri-terrorist orientations such as DAESH and the governmental terrorism of the fake, illegitimate, apartheid and colonialist regime of Zionism. The US assassinated such a personality and such a leader. This shows that the US behaves in a hypocritical manner. Although it commits crimes, it gives them a tinge of morality. This is how the US has behaved in the course of all the crimes that it has committed.
10. If the US does not leave Iraq, it will face a harsh retaliation
Another message that His Eminence conveyed was that the US will no longer be safe. The harsh retaliation is not over. The blood that was shed will not be of the kind that can be forgotten. He says that it is in the best interests of the US to leave Iraq; Otherwise, it will face harsh revenge. These statements were addressed to the Iraqi government, to the US and to the camp of Resistance. If the Americans want to show obstinacy and ignore the bill passed by the Iraqi parliament, then the responsibility of the Resistance front is to throw them out. Therefore, this statement conveys a strong message. It conveys the message to the government and the people of Iraq and to the Resistance front that the secret to survival is resistance, steadfastness and the elimination of occupiers.
The strategy that can guarantee stability, progress and dignity both inside the country and in the region is resistance. That is why His Eminence stressed the issue of resistance. The message was completely clear in the meeting. The message conveyed at the meeting was very important to the camp and groups of Resistance in Iraq. The people of Iraq considered the message as a source of support for themselves. The reception that the meeting received in Iraq, in the region and in popular international media was extraordinary. Therefore, it can be said that the meeting in fact reflected on the Islamic Republic’s strategies in terms of the relations between the two countries, of the US issue, of the position of the Resistance and of the status of Marjayiah in continuing the long path that the people of Iraq have ahead of them.
11. Economic relations with Iraq should be conducted on the basis of dinar and rial
Unlike the noises made here and there, the people of Iraq believe that the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic have stood by the side of the Iraqi nation in all difficult circumstances. However, we should break the lines and do something to connect the economic infrastructures of the two countries. God has given unique capacities to these countries. The enemies are trying to channel public opinion by portraying a negative picture of the Iraqi people for the Iranians and vice versa. This is because the stronger the interactions become, the more hopeless the enemy becomes. If we create a link between the interests of the people, then these interests will prevent governments and occupiers to threaten us. For example, in the area of the economy, the factor that pressures our foreign interactions is the existence of intermediary currencies such as euro and dollar. We should eliminate the euro and dollar from our interactions. We should do business with Iraq with dinar and rial. Perhaps, the first issue that comes to mind is that our transactions with Iraq in the area of energy, for example, amount to two billion dollars and we do not need as much dinar. This is a wrong outlook. We should sign contracts on the basis of rial and dinar and then we should spend dinar. In the present time, what is happening is that they sign contracts on the basis of dollar, but Iraq pays in dinar. This is a huge loss. We should develop the transfer of goods and passengers in an incessant manner and we should eliminate the obstacles ahead of this project. In order to do so, we should set up a joint company and after that, we should employ transportation companies – with good safety standards and good services – as subsidiaries for the joint company. We should work hard and we should not say that this is not possible because of the existence of DAESH and occupiers in Iraq. Whatever we accomplished was accomplished during this time – the existence of such groups. The advent of DAESH caused the firm establishment of the interactions in the area of defense and security for both countries and the Iraqi nation realized that the Islamic Republic was really making sacrifices there. Martyr Soleimani believed that ample opportunities could be created in the heart of crises and the Islamic Republic, under the command of Hajj Qasem, proved itself as the creator of opportunities in the heart of various crises.
We should not be afraid. We should rely on the unique capacities that we enjoy thanks to the people, to reliance on God and to the attention of the Immaculate Imams and we should never hesitate. Whatever the Islamic Republic did in Iraq and in the region was done thanks to martyrs’ blood, to Imams’ attention, to reliance on God and to the nation’s faith. All these originate from a divine leadership. What the world is deprived of today is the existence of such a holy and divine leader who does not think about anything other than doing a deal with God and guiding society.
12. The Resistance front caused the US project to flop
The statements made at the meeting were not only addressed to the Mr. al-Kadhimi administration, rather they were addressed to Resistance, to the US, to regional countries, to the people of Iraq and to the Islamic Republic itself. The Islamic Republic should adopt a more serious approach towards Iraq and it should strengthen its operational measures there. The measures adopted in Iraq until today have proved to serve, in the true sense of the word, our national interests, the cause of the Resistance Front and the discourse of the Islamic Revolution. On the contrary, the first losers in the Iraq case were the Americans and its allies who stood up against the Iraqi people. The Americans did not want to allow the Iraqis to interference in governmental affairs and they had hatched a plan, from the beginning, to establish a military regime once they had taken care of the Saddam regime. The plan did not last more than a few months though. Both the Islamic Republic’s opinion and the Iraqi leaders’ judgment was that it was a dangerous affair and therefore, the pressures against the US began to increase. The US military invasion on Iraq took place without obtaining the permission of the United Nations and the Security Council. The reason was that the US wished to announce to the world that international laws and protocols had changed and that Iraq had been actually occupied. And an occupied country should be run by the occupier. The US conveyed the message to the Islamic Republic that Iraq was not a safe country and therefore, the Islamic Republic should not show its presence there. And its message to countries like France, Germany and neighboring countries was that those who did not participate in the occupation of Iraq did not have the right to participate in its reconstruction project. And they had passed the message to the Iraqis that anyone coming to or leaving Iraq without their permission would be treated as a terrorist. It was in that environment that the Islamic Republic engaged in cooperating with Iraq and offering fundamental guidance and counsel.
However, the bad tactic that the Americans employed was saying that if that government did not exist, they would lift the military government and would replace it with a civil government. The reason why they said such a thing was that the Iraqis themselves were busy establishing a government of their own and we too were encouraging them to do so. Mr. Bremer came to Iraq as a civil ruler. He said that he intended to establish a parliament. What he meant was that he wanted to the only ruler. It meant: “The US is the ruler and the Iraqis should merely give counsel.” It meant that every crime committed by the US would be recorded in the name of the Iraqi leaders and officials. However, we encouraged the Iraqis not to give in to that demand saying that it would not be in their best interest and that every crime committed by the US would be recorded as something done with the consultation of the Iraqi leaders.
The consultative parliament that Mr. Bremer was pursuing was called, “The Interim Governing Council”. Through that council, he appointed some leaders and the length of their term, but everything was in Bremer’s hands. Some of the laws and rules passed at that time continue to do harm to the interests of the Iraqi people and their national interests.
Actually, Mr. Bremer wanted to be the sole ruler in Iraq. The rules that he passed concerning the armed forces, governmental issues and the like contrasted with the interests of the Iraqi people. The Americans committed an act of complete interference in the name of a civil government. This signified the complete violation of national authority. The dismantling of the army and other such measures were adopted at that time. Of course, the Iraqis tried to benefit from some of those rules. However, that was not something that the Americans wanted. At that time, another bad measure that the Americans almost carried out was to impose a constitution draft on the Iraqis.
Before the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and before occupying Iraq, the Americans allegedly adopted two fundamental measures. One was writing a constitution draft and another was signing a deal with about three thousand Iraqis who were supposed to act as counsellors to the Americans in the government that the Americans wanted to install. This would allow the Americans to rule.
At that time, the US considered itself the sole ruler of Iraq and getting over those difficult circumstances was no small endeavor. It was in those circumstances that the issue of an Iraqi government was brought up and issues such as elections and the preparation of a constitution – which the Americans were opposed to – came to the fore. Later on, in the year 2008, the Americans almost imposed a similar thing on Iraq as a security and strategic deal. That was in fact another instance of violating the national authority of Iraq and it was a threat to neighboring countries as well. In that period of time, with the experiences that it had, the Islamic Republic offered good counsel to the Iraqis concerning the preparation of the Constitution, the imposition of the security and strategic deal that the Americans wanted to pursue, the issue of capitulation and the judiciary security of the American soldiers which was totally in contrast with the national authority and independence of that country. Those recommendations proved really valuable to the Iraqis. Of course, the Iraqis are really smart and intelligent and they know where their interests lie. Nonetheless, the Islamic Republic’s experiences were influential and efficient as well because they prevented the Americans from achieving their goals despite their material and military power. In any case, the camp of Resistance managed to move this dangerous and difficult path forward until today despite all challenges and threats.
Final word
The future of the relations between Iran and Iraq is a positive future provided that we endeavor to preserve and strengthen these achievements. The existence of the current ordinary structures is not compatible with the long goals that we have in mind for the region. These days, the ground is being prepared for the formation of multilateral cooperation, particularly in the area of security, which is a very important matter. One day, the Islamic Republic was chanting the slogan that the security of the region depends on multilateral regional cooperation. Today, this is happening and the main pillars for this cooperation are Iran, Iraq and Syria. In the future, this cooperation can turn into a security engineering project with the presence of all countries. Despite the issue of the US’s occupation, we are establishing a new system and a new engineering project in the region. This is a very important matter. If we channel this endeavor on the basis of a guideline, a headquarter and a command center, then considering the position that West Asia enjoys in the new global system, the discourse of resistance will be able to have an important place in shaping the future global equations.
Comment