Ahmadinejad’s Mal-Diplomatic Selections
Author: Javid Ghorban-Oghli
Author: Javid Ghorban-Oghli
On August 24, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appointed four new diplomatic representatives to his administration: Esfandiar Rahim Masha’i as his Special Representative on Middle East affairs, Hamid Baqa’ee as his Special Representative on Asian affairs, Mohammad-Mehdi Akhoundzadeh as his Special Representative on Caspian affairs, and Abolfazl Zohrehvand as his Special Representative on Afghanistan affairs. Ahmadinejad’s choices have lead to protests, particularly among the Majles Committee for National Security and Foreign Affairs.
‘Special Representative’ is a 100 percent diplomatic post. That means it belongs to a seasoned diplomat, not (even) a prominent politician. One who is appointed as a special representative should fulfill the following requirements:
1. Should have high-level diplomatic experience.
2. Should be knowledgeable about the problems and challenges of the related geographical entity, its strategic affairs, and his subject country’s macro-policies regarding the designated area. Otherwise, s/he will face many impasses and could hurt national interests of his country with inappropriate remarks.
3. Should be acknowledged as a professional in the diplomatic apparatus. The rationale is clear: the diplomatic body is not the possession of a single individual or organization in Iran. Various power centers influence the ultimate direction of Iran’s foreign diplomacy, including the leadership of the country, the executive power, the Majles Committee for National Security and Foreign Affairs, and Council of National Security. Lack of consensus over the president’s favorite choice for special representative will created disorder and contradiction.
But do Ahmadinejad’s choices fill these requirements? Interestingly, one of the special representatives, Hamid Baghaei, has no diplomatic experience, not even for a single day. I doubt if his expertise reaches even that of a low-ranking expert in the Foreign Ministry. Another choice, Esfandiar Rahim Masha’i, known for his widely criticized precipitous remarks on befriending the Israeli ‘nation’, is not a consensus candidate and will face serious opposition in his mission. Masha’i’s controversial character will exhaust Ahmadinejad’s time and energy, if only in defending his cabinet’s ‘jewel of the crown’. Abolfazl Zohrehvand is neither a flexible figure nor is he familiar with diplomatic nuances. Mohammad-Mehdi Akhoundzadeh is the only relatively professional diplomat among the four, and I hope he can serve our national interests in the highly complicated area of Caspian affairs, which is one of Iran’s toughest diplomatic challenges.
Ahmadinejad has not breached the law by appointing special representatives, but his choices raise serious doubts. Granting such critical responsibilities to officials unfamiliar with diplomatic affairs will seriously damage our diplomatic objectives and merely create a contradiction between the Foreign Ministry’s agenda and those of the special representatives.
Creating a position as Special Representative on Asian Affairs is also a matter open to question. Special representatives are appointed in areas where due to the multifaceted, extensive nature of affairs, ambassadors –who are also the president’s representatives- fail to engage with the whole range of challenges. For instance, Middle East affairs are complicated due to the presence of several influential political entities such as Israel, Palestine, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. In Afghanistan, the engagement of Pakistan, India, Russia, the U.S., and multinational troops makes the situation complex; and in the Caspian Sea, five littoral states and their disagreement over each one’s share of the sea calls for a special representative. But does that hold true for the largest, most diverse continent of the world? Japan, India, China, and Russia each occupy a separate power bloc. And there’s another question: Ahmadinejad has focused major diplomatic efforts on Africa and Latin American during this presidency. So why hasn’t he appointed a special representative for those regions?
By Javid Ghorban-Oghli as published in Iran Diplomacy
Javid Ghorban-Oghli is Iran’s former ambassador to South Africa.
‘Special Representative’ is a 100 percent diplomatic post. That means it belongs to a seasoned diplomat, not (even) a prominent politician. One who is appointed as a special representative should fulfill the following requirements:
1. Should have high-level diplomatic experience.
2. Should be knowledgeable about the problems and challenges of the related geographical entity, its strategic affairs, and his subject country’s macro-policies regarding the designated area. Otherwise, s/he will face many impasses and could hurt national interests of his country with inappropriate remarks.
3. Should be acknowledged as a professional in the diplomatic apparatus. The rationale is clear: the diplomatic body is not the possession of a single individual or organization in Iran. Various power centers influence the ultimate direction of Iran’s foreign diplomacy, including the leadership of the country, the executive power, the Majles Committee for National Security and Foreign Affairs, and Council of National Security. Lack of consensus over the president’s favorite choice for special representative will created disorder and contradiction.
But do Ahmadinejad’s choices fill these requirements? Interestingly, one of the special representatives, Hamid Baghaei, has no diplomatic experience, not even for a single day. I doubt if his expertise reaches even that of a low-ranking expert in the Foreign Ministry. Another choice, Esfandiar Rahim Masha’i, known for his widely criticized precipitous remarks on befriending the Israeli ‘nation’, is not a consensus candidate and will face serious opposition in his mission. Masha’i’s controversial character will exhaust Ahmadinejad’s time and energy, if only in defending his cabinet’s ‘jewel of the crown’. Abolfazl Zohrehvand is neither a flexible figure nor is he familiar with diplomatic nuances. Mohammad-Mehdi Akhoundzadeh is the only relatively professional diplomat among the four, and I hope he can serve our national interests in the highly complicated area of Caspian affairs, which is one of Iran’s toughest diplomatic challenges.
Ahmadinejad has not breached the law by appointing special representatives, but his choices raise serious doubts. Granting such critical responsibilities to officials unfamiliar with diplomatic affairs will seriously damage our diplomatic objectives and merely create a contradiction between the Foreign Ministry’s agenda and those of the special representatives.
Creating a position as Special Representative on Asian Affairs is also a matter open to question. Special representatives are appointed in areas where due to the multifaceted, extensive nature of affairs, ambassadors –who are also the president’s representatives- fail to engage with the whole range of challenges. For instance, Middle East affairs are complicated due to the presence of several influential political entities such as Israel, Palestine, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. In Afghanistan, the engagement of Pakistan, India, Russia, the U.S., and multinational troops makes the situation complex; and in the Caspian Sea, five littoral states and their disagreement over each one’s share of the sea calls for a special representative. But does that hold true for the largest, most diverse continent of the world? Japan, India, China, and Russia each occupy a separate power bloc. And there’s another question: Ahmadinejad has focused major diplomatic efforts on Africa and Latin American during this presidency. So why hasn’t he appointed a special representative for those regions?
By Javid Ghorban-Oghli as published in Iran Diplomacy