Forum.msk, Russia
Iran Is a Tidbit,
but US Can
Choke On It
By Oleg Sultanov
It is time to face the truth: the U.S. itself is the aggressor that actually has attacked Iraq, Afghanistan and has participated in a military operation against Libya.
Translated By Maksym Mirieiev
23 January 2012
Edited by Steven Stenzler
Russia - Forum.msk - Original Article (Russian)
The Pentagon loudly declares that it has no intention to invade Iran, but "someone" has concentrated combat ships and the aircraft carrier John Stennis in the Persian Gulf. Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that a possible military operation against Iran "will have dire consequences." Perhaps it would be naive to ask the minister who will face the consequences. Not only a potential aggressor and a victim of his geopolitical ambitions, but also millions of Europeans that are far from Iran would suffer.
Digression into the recent past suggests that the events have developed at a speed of a snowball rolling down a hill. It all began after the U.S. and Israel hinted at a fast military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. In turn, the Iranians threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz to prevent oil tankers from passing. The U.S. immediately expressed its discontent with the fact that the blockade of the strait would create a real threat to its energy security, and it immediately declared its intentions to take action to stop Iran's oil exports.
Considering the facts, European analysts agreed that the embargo imposed on Tehran would increase hydrocarbon prices by up to 40 percent. If the war breaks out, the oil prices will surge by 100 percent. The embargo will inevitably cause the next wave of the economic crisis in the European countries that represent major consumers of the Iranian oil - Italy, Greece and Spain, and, of course, it will take a toll on the Islamic Republic of Iran for which the export of hydrocarbon is vital.
Iran has no other source of income in hard currency, and if the Americans succeed in any way in cutting off the Central Bank of Iran from the global financial system, it will lead to a terrible mess in payments for oil exports.
In other words, the United States’ dominance actually poses a risk to the economic security of the Middle East and Europe, and it prevents social development in dozens of countries. Alas, it is time to admit that a grave situation has already emerged, and only one state, the United States of America, would benefit from it. It is time to face the truth: the U.S. itself is the aggressor that actually has attacked Iraq, Afghanistan and has participated in a military operation against Libya.
The current U.S. administration has no intention of refuting the statements made by Reagan regarding Syria and Iran as the main opponents of America in the Middle East. Having eliminated the regime of Moammar Gadhafi, American raw material seekers effectively stopped Chinese investments worth billions of dollars in Libya. Perhaps the same fate is waiting for Chinese financial inflows to Iran which, in turn, provide the People's Republic of China with oil.
The main goal of the U.S. is to isolate the fast-growing Chinese economy from any source of hydrocarbon, including those located in Iran. The stories in the U.S. State Department that the Pentagon is concerned about the emergence of a nuclear-armed Iran are nothing more than tales and pure bluff; even the defense minister of this country, Leon Panetta, a former CIA chief, does not conceal the fact that modern Iran has no real potential to build a nuclear weapon. It will not have such a potential for a long time.
It is worth remembering that Tehran stopped conducting research on its nuclear weapons program nine years ago, as it openly informed the world community. However, stubbornly "introducing democracy to the world," the U.S. strives to artificially create such a "coincidence" of circumstances that would cause them to force recalcitrant Iranians to a "deal.” However, the overseas "democratizers" have not taken into consideration some specific circumstances of Iranian society's historical development.
In 1979, the Islamic Revolution raised a Shiite cleric to power, who managed to implement social reforms on the tide of anti-monarchic and anti-American grassroots rage. After all, the United States had actively supported the Shah Reza Pahlavi, who was much hated in his home country. Still, the word "devil" is synonymous to the abbreviation of "USA" in Iran, while Iranians tend to see the roots of almost any kind of social turmoil in the actions of the White House.
The U.S. leadership remains true to itself, spreading around the world the "enlightened" view that the current regime in Iran relies on the powerful repressive apparatus and financial injections of some other allegedly odious regimes rather than grassroots support. Americans have used such "democratic" rhetoric as a proven weapon of political demagoguery when they need to get access to raw material sources, or when they need to "explicitly" explain their "anti-terrorist" interest in any foreign statehood in the world. In fact, the U.S. abuses its power on the planet, and, besides, it is infamous for its pathological cruelty—mind the video footage of the brutal execution of Saddam Hussein.
It turns out that the U.S. aims to become an actual dictator on Earth, and it does not disdain to use any means to strengthen its economic and political power. For this purpose, it forms military and political elites from those loyal to the idea of "democratization" all around the world.
The explicit contribution of the U.S. in the disintegration of the Soviet Union proves the point. Now, the U.S. is playing the anti-terrorist card in order to eliminate rebellious ethnic groups. Washington's appeal to counter-terrorism and "democratization" (for political and geopolitical reasons) is no longer news for the world community, including, of course, the modern Iran, whose very presence demonstrates the ability of the normal social existence of an ethnically heterogeneous state created along religious lines. Indeed, there are Azerbaijanis, Kurds, Arabs, Turkmen, Baluch, Assyrians, Kashkaytsy and dozens of other ethnicities living along with Persians in present-day Iran.
U.S. agents are eager to drive a wedge between the non-Persian people of Iran, who profess Sunni Islam, and actual Persians who are Shia Muslims—the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran has defined its state as Shiite and Jafarite. However, in my opinion, facing the ideological and political pressure of the U.S., Iranian Shiites and Sunnis will certainly find common language and they will not allow Americans to find support for its "democratization programs" in Iranian society.
It is worth reminding that, unfortunately, in the 1990s, such support was found in Russia. It is impossible to deny that the Orthodox Church, the highest spiritual Muslim leaders of Russia and venerable rabbis hailed any anti-social government innovations and the actions of "the Chicago boys."
It is high time to admit a need for closer political, economic and cultural cooperation between Russia and Iran, and a joint effort to find a resolution to the global problems that concern the people of our countries. Russians and Iranians can and should join efforts to withstand the geopolitical attacks from overseas in order to prevent adverse effects promoted by the American cult of unlimited consumption. This publication is not just some kind of critique against Western civilization, it is rather a personal opinion of the author; in a way, it is an outline of the plan of our nations' survival. Having glanced at the map, we can see that the habitat of Russians and Iranians is being purposefully isolated by the NATO forces.
CLICK HERE FOR
ORIGINAL VERSION
|
|
CLICK HERE for... 
