Aras-Nathan Keul works in political Berlin and specializes in Germany's role in the Middle East. The German-Iranian scholar (32) has become one of the loudest voices in the diaspora since the murder of Jina Mahsa Amini. We spoke with him.
When you think about the words of Foreign Minister Baerbock of feminist foreign policy, what do you think about the movements in Iran that have been going on for months?
The revolution in Iran is a huge opportunity - because women in particular play such a big role there. This has never happened before in the Middle East, with women leading a revolutionary movement and dragging an entire society along with them. That is a role model and worthy of support. Measured by Mrs. Baerbock's own standards, however, far too little has happened so far. No one is asking the West to invade Iran - that will not happen. What we are asking is that Germany and the European Union stop backing the Iranian regime and instead support the people in the country.
If the EU Parliament votes in its resolution to allow the Revolutionary Guards to be listed as a terrorist organization, what do you expect from the German government?
The vote in the European Parliament can be a strong signal. But EU Foreign Minister Borell has already made clear in his speech why there will be no change - in German, as well as in European Iran policy: the JCPoA nuclear agreement is seen as the only way to deal with the regime. But this way has failed: we see that the Islamic Republic systematically oppresses, tortures and murders its population, is on the verge of building a nuclear bomb, and promotes war and terrorism throughout the Middle East - including, by the way, Russia, which is equipping it with drones for its illegal war against Ukraine. All of this made the nuclear agreement possible in the first place - the EU needs to admit this and therefore urgently present an alternative to the JCPoA and formulate a new Iran policy.
In the wake of the regime's protests and brutal repression, doesn't the nuclear agreement seem somewhat hypocritical?
German and European foreign policy makes the mistake of thinking that the nuclear threat and the situation in the country should be treated separately. But the origin of both the nuclear bomb and the repression of the population is one: the aggressive ideology of the regime. And at the same time, the solution to these very problems is one: the success of the revolution. A free and democratic Iran would no longer foster terror, but would be a reliable anchor of stability in a conflict-ridden region.
How would you generally describe the course of Germany's Iran policy since the Islamic Republic of Iran came into existence?
For the Foreign Office, dictatorship means stability. This is a fundamental problem - and with regard to Iran, it becomes even clearer: For 43 years, everything has been tried to conduct a dialogue with a regime that in fact has no interest in a dialogue at all, but only wants to impose its ideology. We can see this in the fact that the Islamic Center Hamburg still exists in Germany today, which is basically a tolerated extension of the regime in Germany. Germany has been the mullahs' most loyal partner in Europe, perhaps even in the entire Western world.
How can it be that one holds on so tightly to a regime that one oneself calls a brutal, inhuman dictatorship?
People have always believed, contrary to the facts, that they could bring the regime to internal reform through dialogue and trade. This is the same approach - and mistake - that was made with Russia and is still being made with China. That course has failed, as we all saw on February 24, 2022, when Russia attacked Ukraine. In the case of Iran, however, there is no such insight - and thus no real rethinking. It's not Baerbock alone; it's officials in the Foreign Office and in Europe who helped negotiate the nuclear agreement and are not drawing any conclusions from its failure.
Why won't they learn from the mistake in dealing with Russia?
On Ukraine, there is a European and transatlantic consensus to support Ukraine - justified with war in Europe. It is different with Iran, and Chancellor Olaf Scholz and the Foreign Office are not counting on the success of the revolution in Iran. They seem to be more interested in maintaining relations as they have been for the past 43 years.
So do economic interests outweigh human rights?
The crucial interest is stability in Iran and in the region. But in this, the Iranian regime does not provide stability at all, but on the contrary instability in the region and worldwide, with the Revolutionary Guard promoting wars and terrorism in Lebanon, Yemen, Gaza, Syria, or even Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine. It has become apparent: The Islamic regime in Iran is the enemy of all people who want to live in peace.
Do you think the movement will make it without support from the West?
The genie is out of the bottle and can no longer be captured. The people who are taking to the streets in Iran no longer want reforms or concessions. They want a new political system, freedom and democracy. For that, they don't need outside interference, they just need us to end the existing outside interference - that is, support for the Islamic Republic.