IV

 "Mother of All Islamic Lands":  

The Mullahs' Foreign Policy

We have a huge position in the Islamic world. No country other than Iran can lead the Islamic world; this is a historical position.

 -Muhammad-Javad Larijani, August 7,1989, principal foreign policy advisor to Rafsanjani.¹

The Rafsanjani administration's approach to foreign policy may differ from Khomeini's, but the ultimate goal remains the same: expansion of the rule of the Islamic Republic and establishment of a caliphate similar to the Ottoman Empire but controlled from Tehran. The present state of the world-especially the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc-has encouraged the mullahs to believe that they can realize this goal. Tehran's rulers reason, however, that a comprehensive, step-by-step strategy is required to export the Islamic revolution. As Khomeini's right-hand man for a decade and acting commander of the armed forces, including the Revolutionary Guards, Rafsanjani oversaw a series of extraterritorial terrorist operations, such as kidnappings, hostage takings, assassinations, and ill-fated coups. But the overextended, random, and incoherent mix has outlived its usefulness. Describing Tehran's new methods of exporting its revolution, Muhammad-Javad Larijani has said: 

The first [source of our national strategy] is our position within the Islamic world. This means Iran must not be limited by its geographic boundaries. . . . Iran is not just one among many Islamic countries. Today we face a division of the world into geographic states that has no justice and that has a very bitter past. Now, should we accept these frontiers or not? . . . We do [in fact] accept the world's geographic boundaries - in order to avoid trouble. [But] our Islamic responsibility does not [just] go away. This responsibility crosses borders. . . . We have to plan our policies and our diplomacy in such a way that they match our position in the Islamic world. No country other than Iran can lead the Islamic world; this is a historical position.²

     Elsewhere, Larijani, who is sometimes described in the West as a moderate, asserted: "The true velayat-e-faqih is in Iran. This velayat is responsible for all of the Islamic world." He enumerated the "three vital objectives of the Islamic Republic: The first is maintaining the Islamic nature of our regime and our status in the Islamic world. The second is defending the republic's security, and the third is expansion."³

     After Khomeini's death, his successors recognized that his absence would make the domestic situation far more precarious. Lengthy, detailed discussions among members of the Supreme National Security Council, chaired by Rafsanjani, led to a consensus that the "Islamic Republic" could not survive without the spread of the Islamic revolution beyond Iran's borders. Advocates of this theory referred to the split between Trotsky and Stalin after the Russian revolution. They argued that the Soviet Union's disintegration confirmed the validity of Trotsky's theory of a "permanent world revolution," which asserts that the proletarian revolution confined within the borders of a single country will suffocate. The clerics, borrowing Trotsky's thesis, claimed that the only way to preserve their Islamic revolution was to foment Islamic revolutions in other countries.

     Muhammad Khatami, minister of Islamic culture and guidance and a chief policy maker in Rafsanjani's cabinet until spring 1992, explained the doctrine of export of revolution in a roundtable discussion on the "National Security Strategy of the Islamic Republic of Iran."⁴ Khatami argued: "Where do we look when drawing up our strategy? Do we look to preserve the integrity of our land, or do we look to expansion? Do we look to bast (expansion) or to hefz (preservation)? We must definitely focus on expansion."⁵ (Ironically, Khatami was ousted by the conservative faction in April 1992 for being too liberal. In July, Rafsanjani appointed Ali Larijani, a Revolutionary Guards commander, to succeed Khatami.(

     Rafsanjani echoed the same theme: "Islamic Iran is the base for all Muslims the world over. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind, and I am certain that His Holiness the Imam would have said that we do not want this revolution only for ourselves, that we care about others. He truly and deeply hated the idea that we be limited by nationalism, by race, or by our own land."⁶

     Muhammad-Sa'id Raja'i-Khorassani, chairman of the Majlis Foreign Relations Committee and former ambassador to the United Nations in New York, also dubbed a "moderate" by some Western observers, commented on the golden opportunity presented for the export of the Islamic revolution by the fall of communism: "Disappointed by materialist and worldly governments, the world has turned its attention today to the Islamic nation and sovereignty of God. People have concluded that a government not ruled by Islam is doomed to destruction and annihilation. Today, the victory of Islamic Iran in the international arena is the victory of the Islamic world. And the Islamic world sees its salvation as dependent on the Islamic government of Iran."⁷

     The regime's policy planners, such as Larijani, refer to Iran as Umm ol-Qura, or the "Mother of All Islamic Lands." From this perspective, Iran is the center of gravity for the world's fundamentalist Islamic movements and the source of their momentum. The mullahs believe that without the Islamic Republic's active moral and material support, the fundamentalist movements in other countries would be incapable, as in previous decades, of expanding beyond an isolated religious sect or of seizing power in any country.

     The events of the 1970s support this assertion. Serious political, social, and economic grievances - from unfair distribution of wealth to sprawling and corrupt bureaucracies - existed to varying degrees throughout the region. But until the fundamentalist clerics seized power in Iran in 1979 and began to actively export their revolution by providing organization, finances, and training to fundamentalists in other countries, these forces never posed a serious threat to their governments.

     The mullahs therefore believe that their regime must act as the model and the nurturer, providing moral and material sustenance (arms, training, money, and propaganda) to religious fundamentalists in Islamic countries. Explaining the Umm ol-Qura theory, Larijani maintained:

Why do I believe our duty is not limited by land or geographic boundaries? Because in the Islamic Republic, we do not have merely an Islamic government; we have and have had the velayat, both during the Imam's [Khomeini's] time and during Ayatollah Khamenei's. This velayat is a righteous jurist ruling the entire Islamic nation. Muslims may not even realize that we have such a jurist ruling here, but this does not undermine the reality of this guardianship. Of course, it affects the ruling jurist's effectiveness, but not the principle. As long as this guardianship exists, the velayat is responsible for the Islamic world, and it is the duty of the Islamic world to protect the ruling jurist. . . . As long as our country is the seat of the true ruling jurist, we are responsible for the whole Islamic nation, and the Islamic nation is duty-bound to safeguard the Umm ol-Qura.⁸

     Similarly, in a recent speech Rafsanjani said, "Iran is the base of the new movement of the world of Islam. . . . The eyes of Muslims worldwide are focused here."⁹ The minister of Islamic culture and guidance commented on foreign policy:

     As far as resources and equipment are concerned, I think we have a long way to go to catch up with our enemies. No matter how much we acquire, the enemy still has the upper hand. We should forget this wishful thinking that someday we might be able to challenge our main rivals in technology and arms. Hence, the question is, what can we do to enter the international arena? We need a power that the enemy does not have a power superior to technology and arms. Our power lies in the nascent Islamic force awakening the world over, in those prepared to sacrifice themselves. The Islamic Republic's survival depends on the support of such a global force. The Islamic movement in Algeria is serious, and we can count on Sudan. New centres of power are taking shape in the world of Islam. Growing Islamic forces abound in the world, and we must truly depend on them. ¹⁰

     The export of revolution and fundamentalism is thus indispensable to the Iranian clerics and is the basis of their national security strategy. The Muslim world's receptivity to fundamentalism, as well as the collapse of the Soviet Union, has convinced the clerical rulers that the policy of bast, or expansion, is the only guarantee for their survival.

     The velayat-e-faqih government's guiding foreign policy principle dictates "the establishment of the worldwide sovereignty of Islam." "From an Islamic standpoint, the world is generally divided into two camps: dar ol-Islam (the home of Islam), where the divine laws of Islam are implemented and Islamic rule prevails, and dar ol-kofr or dar ol-Harb (the home of blasphemy), where the ruling regimes do not act in accordance with Islamic laws. On this basis, Islam recognizes only one boundary, purely ideological in nature. Other boundaries, including geographic borders, are rejected and condemned."¹¹