Three anti-Iran forces in Washington may be pushing the U.S. towards a war with Iran, a veteran Iranian diplomat who had till recently served as an adviser to Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, told CGTN Digital, while urging international players like China and Russia to make efforts towards de-escalation to prevent outbreak of an "accidental flare up" amid surging tensions in the Persian Gulf.

"The U.S. is hostage to three different ideologies – the neo-cons, pro-Israeli Jewish lobby and the Saudi-funded Wahhabists. They could be the immediate backers of a war [between the U.S. and Iran]," Dr. Mostafa Zahrani, currently a professor at Iran's foreign ministry-run School of International Relations, said in the exclusive interview on Skype from the Iranian capital Tehran.

These distinct interest groups were also responsible for Washington pursuing misguided policies on Iran, "which are not necessarily in line" even with U.S.'s own national interests, noted Zahrani, a former director general of the Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS), a Tehran-based foreign policy think tank affiliated to Iran's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Related story: Iran dismisses possibility of conflict, says does not want war

Read also: U.S. not seeking war with Iran, says top defense official

Tensions between Washington and Tehran soared over the fortnight as the U.S. deployed the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group and B-52 bombers to the Gulf over what it termed Iranian "threats". Washington's version has been met with widespread skepticism outside the U.S.

Last Wednesday, Trump administration ordered non-essential staff out of Iraq and on Saturday, the Federal Aviation Administration issued a warning to U.S. airlines flying over the Gulf to exercise caution.

On Sunday, U.S. President Donald Trump issued an ominous threat to Tehran. "If Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran. Never threaten the United States again," Trump said in a tweet, further triggering war fears.

The United Nations on Monday expressed concern about the belligerent rhetoric being exchanged, urging both sides to show calm. 

'War will not happen'

Read also: Rouhani: 'Situation' not suitable for talks, resistance is only choice

Zahrani, however, downplayed Trump's bellicose saber-rattling as typical of Washington's coercive diplomacy. "In coercive diplomacy, you should be able to make your opponent believe that war is serious. Some individuals [in the U.S.], as I said, are serious about that. Although the leadership is not really for a war," he said. "Institutional threat is a part of U.S. strategic thinking since the Cold War. They still think this is a useful instrument when they talk to Iran," he added.

Citing previous remarks from Trump and Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, Zahrani said: "Both of them have emphasized that they don't want war and [therefore] war will not happen."

"We see a type of rationality on both sides. They try to understand the environment outside their mindset and how the other side thinks of its strategic interests and at the same time possibly [take into account] common threats on both sides. All this indicate that war is not something that is inevitable," he asserted.

Emphasizing that Iran is a status quo force in the region and that Washington would do well to realize that common threats such as religious extremism in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan can't be dealt with without Tehran's help, Zahrani felt that while "the rhetoric is high, they do have common threat and also common interest enough that'll push them not to go to a war." 

'Iran is not confused'

Read also: Iraqi PM says to send teams to Tehran, Washington to calm tensions

The White House has sent mixed signals in recent days, amid multiple U.S. media reports of infighting in Trump's cabinet over how hard to push Iran.

The U.S. president, however, felt that it is Iran that is confused. "At least Iran doesn't know what to think, which at this point may very well be a good thing!" he tweeted on Friday.

Zahrani laughed off Trump's suggestion. "Iran is not confused about what is happening. It's been 40 years [since] the situation between Iran and the U.S. [collapsed]. We do know three strategies are there: one is war; second is rapprochement between the two; and the third is a type of Cold War between both sides," he said, adding that sometimes the situation worsens to "short of war, like the situation right now."

"We have experience from the past. We know that the real strategy of the U.S. is containing Iran and the main piece of that containment is economic pressure and sanctions. This time, the military exposure is there to support that strategy," he added. 

'Threat of an accidental war'

Read also: Saudi calls for urgent Arab talks over Iran tensions

Although Iran has displayed much calm amid U.S. provocation, there have been sporadic instances of rhetoric flowing from Tehran as well. On Friday, Mohammad Saleh Jokar, Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards deputy for parliamentary affairs, said Tehran could "easily" hit U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf.

The Guards were declared a terrorist organization by the U.S. in April. Iran retaliated by subsequently designating all U.S. troops as "terrorists."

Jokar's remarks came days after four ships including two Saudi oil tankers were damaged in mysterious sabotage attacks off the coast of Fujairah, in the UAE, near the Strait of Hormuz – a key maritime route for oil exports.

While Zahrani dismissed speculations of a deliberate military conflict, he didn't rule out the threat of an accidental war. "This can happen from both sides, which I personally hope, does not happen," he said.

The Iran-U.S. tensions have prompted global fears over the security of the vital oil route. Zahrani suggested those fears are real amid Washington's declared intention of barring Iran from exporting oil.

"We are responsible [for the security of Strait of Hormuz], but if Iran is not allowed to sell its oil as announced by the U.S., then we don't feel that much responsible to go after rogue elements [who may sabotage the oil routes]," he remarked. 

'Conditions of peace'

Read also: China hopes Iran nuclear deal 'fully implemented': FM

EU supports Iran nuclear deal, may talk to Pompeo

Under a U.S.-Iran deadlock, Zahrani said there is a bigger responsibility on the shoulders of big international players such as China, Russia, India, and the European Union to enforce, what he described as the "conditions of peace" of which the landmark 2015 nuclear deal is an essential part.

At the core of the current escalation is Trump's unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal – officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – last year, which led to the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions on Iran.

"While we focus on causes of war, we must also focus on conditions of peace. One of the conditions of the peace is JCPOA. If everybody wants to have peace and no war, so let's everybody stick to JCPOA, not only expect Iran to stick to JCPOA," said the former diplomat.

"We do think that if there is going to be any peace, the condition of the peace should come from the structure of the system, of big players of international system, that's what I keep telling [about the key] role of China, India and also Russia and of course Europe," he added.

There are concerns that constant pressure on Iran will force it to rethink its commitment to the nuclear deal. Zahrani confirmed these fears. "In Iran almost nobody really cares any more for Iran staying in that deal with this current condition. If the pressure mounts, it means there will be more and more pressure within... on [President Hassan] Rouhani's government to pull out from the deal."

He, however, clarified that many Iranians still think that the nuclear deal is in the interest of their country, but that can change if Iran stops benefiting from it.

Zahrani lauded former U.S. President Barack Obama for his efforts to get the nuclear deal in place following years of negotiations. "Obama made a very clever decision. He thought if there's going to be peace, there should be some type of strategic equilibrium in the region. That's why he went for JCPOA.  JCPOA had a very strategic prospect in his view for long-term peace."

"So, if everybody wants to have a peace in the region, if everybody wants to see Iran on the board, they somehow should think in that context. I mean, strategic equilibrium inside the region, not bid everybody against everybody," he concluded.

Interviewer: Abhishek G Bhaya

Video Editor: Anosi Wang and Tyler Lin

(Cover photo: An F/A-18E Super Hornet from the "Jolly Rogers" of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA-103) flies above the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) in the Arabian Sea, May 18, 2019. /Reuters Photo)