Nobel Peace Prize Winner Wants War
The deployment of U.S. military ships — escorted by nuclear submarines — headed for the coast of Iran reveals the bellicose intentions of Barack Obama’s government. He is trying to impose his will on the government of Iran with respect to its plans for the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. To accomplish this, Obama is using every kind of pressure, including recent sanctions put in place by the Security Council of the United Nations, on the recommendation (or imposition; it is the same) of the United States.
In this pre-war scenario, Saudi Arabia would authorize the use of its air space for military aircraft from the United States and Israel. It also would install interceptor missiles in four countries: Qatar, the Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait, in a pincer-like operation that would nullify any possible Iranian defense options.
Next, Israel would second this military action, and its ships would have the extra-legal authority to stop and search any ship circulating in those waters under suspicion of transporting weapons. Iran, of course, would be classified as one of those states that give shelter to terrorists, ignoring, of course, the fact that gringos and Zionists do the very same thing.
What lies at the root of all these maneuvers is the ambition of transnational corporations (both gringo and European) to take control of all the energy resources that exist in the region of the Middle East, just as was done in Afghanistan and Iraq. At the same time, the overall purpose is to create a situation more beneficial to the hegemony of the United States, a plan put in place during the dangerous governance of George W. Bush. This plan still exists, considering the content of the American strategic vision, which assigns territorial control of the world’s natural resources to the U.S., as though it were a planetary police officer for whom the independent life and culture of the peoples of the rest of the world were something secondary, valueless when compared to the economic interests at stake.
In addition, the warlike threats that have erupted lately in the Korean peninsula, creating a clash that could facilitate the direct intervention of Yankee troops, demonstrate that Obama is playing with fire. He is carrying out the directives of the military-industrial complex that dominates his country, legitimizing the unilateral use of nuclear weapons under the mere supposition that the United States might be attacked eventually. This issue takes us back to the time of tension during the Cold War. However, we now lack the counterweight of a military power with the size and might of the former Soviet Union.
With that, Obama (prematurely awarded the Nobel Peace Prize) maintains and perfects the doctrine of preventive war that Bush instituted after the dark destruction of the Twin Towers in New York. He also allows Israel to do the same to its Arab neighbors, but on a scale both global and unlimited, without the right of self-defense for those countries who have the bad luck to be attacked.
The situation is not unusual, so it should not be a surprise to anyone. In the past, the U.S. conducted military exercises of its Fifth Fleet, stationed in the waters of the Persian Gulf, along the Iranian coast, with intimidation as its apparent motive. Therefore, Yankee imperialism is not willing to modify its chosen path of putting pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease and desist in its nuclear program. In fact, it is less willing now, since it has successfully forced the U.N. and other nations to bow their heads. There is nothing to stop the U.S. from blatantly violating any provision of international law, and others seem to accept such actions as inevitable.
This situation also exposes the fact that Washington makes use of a double standard with respect to the nuclear question. It denounces Iran as a threat to world peace, but turns a blind eye to its own failure to comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, conceived in 1968 with the goal of restricting the possession and use of nuclear weapons. Such a treaty, of course, infringes on the practices of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China, all of whom have such weapons in large quantities. Another issue is the fact that Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea, who all have atomic bombs, have not signed the treaty. Naturally, the first three are allies of the U.S. and have received preferential treatment by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors compliance on behalf of the United Nations.
North Korea and Iran (Iran being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but accused repeatedly — without any concrete proof — of wanting to develop the bomb) have been condemned directly and openly by the IAEA and the founding countries of the Treaty. These actions seem to indicate a practically colonial (and complicit) subordination in relation to the interests of U.S. imperialists and their European partners.
In this pre-war scenario, Saudi Arabia would authorize the use of its air space for military aircraft from the United States and Israel. It also would install interceptor missiles in four countries: Qatar, the Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait, in a pincer-like operation that would nullify any possible Iranian defense options.
Next, Israel would second this military action, and its ships would have the extra-legal authority to stop and search any ship circulating in those waters under suspicion of transporting weapons. Iran, of course, would be classified as one of those states that give shelter to terrorists, ignoring, of course, the fact that gringos and Zionists do the very same thing.
What lies at the root of all these maneuvers is the ambition of transnational corporations (both gringo and European) to take control of all the energy resources that exist in the region of the Middle East, just as was done in Afghanistan and Iraq. At the same time, the overall purpose is to create a situation more beneficial to the hegemony of the United States, a plan put in place during the dangerous governance of George W. Bush. This plan still exists, considering the content of the American strategic vision, which assigns territorial control of the world’s natural resources to the U.S., as though it were a planetary police officer for whom the independent life and culture of the peoples of the rest of the world were something secondary, valueless when compared to the economic interests at stake.
In addition, the warlike threats that have erupted lately in the Korean peninsula, creating a clash that could facilitate the direct intervention of Yankee troops, demonstrate that Obama is playing with fire. He is carrying out the directives of the military-industrial complex that dominates his country, legitimizing the unilateral use of nuclear weapons under the mere supposition that the United States might be attacked eventually. This issue takes us back to the time of tension during the Cold War. However, we now lack the counterweight of a military power with the size and might of the former Soviet Union.
With that, Obama (prematurely awarded the Nobel Peace Prize) maintains and perfects the doctrine of preventive war that Bush instituted after the dark destruction of the Twin Towers in New York. He also allows Israel to do the same to its Arab neighbors, but on a scale both global and unlimited, without the right of self-defense for those countries who have the bad luck to be attacked.
The situation is not unusual, so it should not be a surprise to anyone. In the past, the U.S. conducted military exercises of its Fifth Fleet, stationed in the waters of the Persian Gulf, along the Iranian coast, with intimidation as its apparent motive. Therefore, Yankee imperialism is not willing to modify its chosen path of putting pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease and desist in its nuclear program. In fact, it is less willing now, since it has successfully forced the U.N. and other nations to bow their heads. There is nothing to stop the U.S. from blatantly violating any provision of international law, and others seem to accept such actions as inevitable.
This situation also exposes the fact that Washington makes use of a double standard with respect to the nuclear question. It denounces Iran as a threat to world peace, but turns a blind eye to its own failure to comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, conceived in 1968 with the goal of restricting the possession and use of nuclear weapons. Such a treaty, of course, infringes on the practices of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China, all of whom have such weapons in large quantities. Another issue is the fact that Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea, who all have atomic bombs, have not signed the treaty. Naturally, the first three are allies of the U.S. and have received preferential treatment by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors compliance on behalf of the United Nations.
North Korea and Iran (Iran being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but accused repeatedly — without any concrete proof — of wanting to develop the bomb) have been condemned directly and openly by the IAEA and the founding countries of the Treaty. These actions seem to indicate a practically colonial (and complicit) subordination in relation to the interests of U.S. imperialists and their European partners.