Row brews in Iran over use of its drones in Ukraine war by Russia
|
Version 0 of 1. Conservative cleric and a newspaper editor openly critical of government’s stance on weapons it supplied to Moscow An internal rift over the supply of deadly drones to Russia for use in Ukraine has opened up in Iran, with a prominent conservative cleric and newspaper editor saying Russia is the clear aggressor in the war and the supply should stop. A former Iranian ambassador to Moscow has also hinted the foreign ministry may have been kept in the dark both by the Kremlin and the Iranian military. Iran has denied for more than two months that it sold the drones to Russia despite their use to target power stations and civilian infrastructure, but at the weekend said it had supplied a small number of drones before the war started, an explanation that has been rejected by the US and Ukraine. The row over the drones reflects a wider foreign policy debate in Tehran about the risks of developing close links with Moscow. It is also unusual, in that the criticism of Iran’s government is being led by a conservative cleric and a newspaper editor. In remarks picked up by other Iranian newspapers, Masih Mohajeri, writing on the front page of the newspaper Jomhouri-e-Islami, highlighted three things the government should have done: advised the party that started the war, ie Russia, to observe international regulations that prohibit encroachment on the territory of other countries; told Russia at the outset of the war that it had no right to use the drones in Ukraine that Iran had provided; maintained stronger relations with the invaded country. Addressing the Iranian foreign minister, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, he added: “Why did you not announce to Russia after the start of the war in Ukraine that it has no right to use Iranian drones in the war in Ukraine? Furthermore, why have you not openly condemned Russia for starting the war and why have you not made a redoubled effort to mediate between the two sides to end this evil war?” He said Iran could have played this role without damaging its relations with Russia. Abdollahian at the weekend ended weeks of prevarication in Iran over the drones by admitting – while standing next to the Russian deputy foreign minister, Sergei Vershinin, on the sidelines of an international conference – that it had provided a small number of drones before the war. He said if it was proven by Ukraine that its drones were being used in the war, Iran would not be indifferent. Ukraine believes Moscow acquired 2,400 drones from Iran, including the distinctive triangle-shaped Shahed-136 “kamikaze” drone that detonates on impact. Mohajeri described the foreign minister’s change of stance as a “good omen” in his newspaper article. “You still have time to change policy on the war in Ukraine,” he said. “You should not put all your eggs in the Russian basket. This method contradicts the policy of ‘neither east nor west’ which is the core of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” He added: “The least that … Iran could have done in the war in Ukraine was to first negotiate with both sides by forming a mediation committee to get them to agree to a ceasefire and an end to the war. In the very days of the beginning of the war, Tehran could have announced to Moscow that it has no right to use the drones provided by Iran in the war on Ukraine.” Robert Malley, the US special envoy on Iran, dismissed Iran’s admission. “The evidence is clear: the drones sold to Russia are being used against Ukrainian civilians. Perhaps Iran’s leaders thought they could escape the consequences of secretly helping Russia’s brutal aggression, but they couldn’t.” A former Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Nematollah Izadi, said it appeared there had been no proper cooperation between the military and diplomatic wings of the Iranian state, possibly leaving the foreign ministry in the dark. It seemed one section of the government thought it profitable to sell drones to Moscow for the use in the war or otherwise, Izadi said, and “we seem to have succumbed to a deception operation by Russia, which, in my opinion, does not serve our national interests at all”. An unofficial adviser to the Iranian negotiating team on the future of the Iran nuclear deal, Seyed Mohammad Marandi, however, exemplified the opposition to Ukraine within parts of the regime, by criticising the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, for sending congratulations to the newly-elected Israeli government. “When Zelenskiy says ‘real democracy in action’ and that the two regimes ‘share common values’ he means they both treat subjugated ethnic Russian Ukrainians and the indigenous population of Palestine with similar racial contempt,” he tweeted. Street protests against the regime that began after the death in September of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini, who was detained by police for allegedly violating the country’s strict hijab law, appeared to be slowing, but at the weekend two victorious Iranian international sports teams – the Iranian beach football team and the wrestling team – refused to celebrate their victories. The scorer of Iran’s decisive goal in the final of the Intercontinental Beach Soccer Cup against Brazil symbolically cut his hair after his shot went into the net in an apparent show of solidarity with the female demonstrators. Many of the spectators in Dubai either booed the national anthem or chanted against the government outside the stadium. Fierce debate rages within the regime about the appropriate response to the protests, ranging from some conservative MPs demanding executions to others calling for self-reflection about how the principles of the revolution have lost traction with a generation. Some leaders frankly admit bewilderment. Tourism and culture minister Ezzatollah Zarghami said on Sunday that that one of the interrogators of the thousands of detained protesters admitted that he did not understand them. “I have interrogated big political figures for a lifetime, and in the past few days I have interrogated hundreds of people,” Zarghami said the investigator had told him. “This was my most difficult interrogation because I do not understand what they are saying and they do not understand what I am saying. No matter how hard I try, I cannot.” |