Did Russia Sell Iran Off to the U.S.?
Published in Rosa Al Yousef
(Egypt) on 17 November 2010
by Isam Abd Allah (link to original)
Russia is the greatest promoter of the scenario of an upcoming war in the Middle East, particularly between Iran and Israel. On Sept. 22, Russia canceled a deal to supply Iran — which will attend, probably for the first time, the NATO summit in Lisbon on November 19-20 — with S-300 missiles, in accordance with Security Council resolution 1929 of June 9, 2010.
The Iranian president affirmed that Russia made this decision under American pressure. He stated literally to Iran's official media, "Some [Russia] who are under the influence of Satan [a reference to the United States] believe that if they unilaterally and illegally cancel some defense agreements that they have with us, it will hurt the Iranian nation."
Philip Gordon, assistant secretary of the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, stated that Russia's decision to stop supplying Tehran with S-300 missiles wasn't a gift to the U.S., but was completely in Moscow's own interests. Moreover, Russia would benefit more by signing the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and by being a transit point for the war in Afghanistan, since the shipments of arms for NATO forces go across Russian lands.
"Possible Exits from the Middle East Predicament" was the title of the principal worksheet of the international meeting held by the Moscow State Institute of International Relations about a month ago. Some of the most prominent Russian experts on the regional issues took part in this meeting; Vitaly Naumkin, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies, was at the forefront. There was also Yevgeny Satanovsky, director of the Russian Institute of Israeli and Middle Eastern Studies, who confirmed that the real threat in the region comes from Iran, which might have a war with Israel soon.
It seems that no one in research or study centers talked about anything other than "the possibilities, expectations and alternatives" of this upcoming war before, during or after the midterm elections for American Congress. George Friedman, a scholar at the Strategic Studies Institute, wrote that if Obama declared a war on Iran, the Iranian regime would be "eviscerated militarily. A successful campaign would ease the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, calm the Saudis and demonstrate to the Europeans American capability and will. It would also cause the Russians and Chinese to become very thoughtful." Obama, due to his domestic predicament, is in a real need to look like an effective leader, and Iran is a logical target to achieve this.
The destiny of Obama's renewal for 2012 needs two miracles. The first (domestic) is to get over the economic crisis, for talking about these elections and its results — apart from the economy and the domestic situation in the U.S. — is just a fantasy since the unemployment rate is still fixed at 9.6 percent, which proves the economy hasn't overcome the global financial crisis.
The second miracle (external) is to successfully handle four files at the same time: Iraq, Afghanistan, the negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians and Iran's nuclear file. The latter two are the most important now, especially after the takeover by the Republicans. Therefore, Obama might want to get rid of the Palestinian rights issue; just as he already retreated from his public positions on the Israeli settlements, he also didn't disapprove of Netanyahu's declaration that "the Israeli state is Jewish." It's expected that he will maneuver his support to Israel and ask Palestinians to accept Israel as a Jewish state in exchange for American aid.
Obama will use his entire armory to win a new term after all (there is no honor in war, as the French say). He will flirt with the Jewish lobby by all means, hoping to get its financial, media and political support, ready to start a war, or allow Israel to, with Iran.
The most recent report of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace by Dmitri Trenin and Alexey Malashenko, issued days before, entitled "Iran: A View from Moscow", (SEE HERE) concludes, "Iran’s emergence as a rising power is straining its relations with Russia. While many outside observers assume the two countries enjoy a close relationship, in reality it is highly complex. Although Iran and Russia have strong economic and military ties, Moscow is increasingly wary of Tehran’s growing ambitions ... And a nuclear Iran would significantly diminish Russia’s influence in the wider Caspian region that includes the Caucasus and Central Asia."
The Iranian president affirmed that Russia made this decision under American pressure. He stated literally to Iran's official media, "Some [Russia] who are under the influence of Satan [a reference to the United States] believe that if they unilaterally and illegally cancel some defense agreements that they have with us, it will hurt the Iranian nation."
Philip Gordon, assistant secretary of the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, stated that Russia's decision to stop supplying Tehran with S-300 missiles wasn't a gift to the U.S., but was completely in Moscow's own interests. Moreover, Russia would benefit more by signing the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and by being a transit point for the war in Afghanistan, since the shipments of arms for NATO forces go across Russian lands.
"Possible Exits from the Middle East Predicament" was the title of the principal worksheet of the international meeting held by the Moscow State Institute of International Relations about a month ago. Some of the most prominent Russian experts on the regional issues took part in this meeting; Vitaly Naumkin, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies, was at the forefront. There was also Yevgeny Satanovsky, director of the Russian Institute of Israeli and Middle Eastern Studies, who confirmed that the real threat in the region comes from Iran, which might have a war with Israel soon.
It seems that no one in research or study centers talked about anything other than "the possibilities, expectations and alternatives" of this upcoming war before, during or after the midterm elections for American Congress. George Friedman, a scholar at the Strategic Studies Institute, wrote that if Obama declared a war on Iran, the Iranian regime would be "eviscerated militarily. A successful campaign would ease the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, calm the Saudis and demonstrate to the Europeans American capability and will. It would also cause the Russians and Chinese to become very thoughtful." Obama, due to his domestic predicament, is in a real need to look like an effective leader, and Iran is a logical target to achieve this.
The destiny of Obama's renewal for 2012 needs two miracles. The first (domestic) is to get over the economic crisis, for talking about these elections and its results — apart from the economy and the domestic situation in the U.S. — is just a fantasy since the unemployment rate is still fixed at 9.6 percent, which proves the economy hasn't overcome the global financial crisis.
The second miracle (external) is to successfully handle four files at the same time: Iraq, Afghanistan, the negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians and Iran's nuclear file. The latter two are the most important now, especially after the takeover by the Republicans. Therefore, Obama might want to get rid of the Palestinian rights issue; just as he already retreated from his public positions on the Israeli settlements, he also didn't disapprove of Netanyahu's declaration that "the Israeli state is Jewish." It's expected that he will maneuver his support to Israel and ask Palestinians to accept Israel as a Jewish state in exchange for American aid.
Obama will use his entire armory to win a new term after all (there is no honor in war, as the French say). He will flirt with the Jewish lobby by all means, hoping to get its financial, media and political support, ready to start a war, or allow Israel to, with Iran.
The most recent report of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace by Dmitri Trenin and Alexey Malashenko, issued days before, entitled "Iran: A View from Moscow", (SEE HERE) concludes, "Iran’s emergence as a rising power is straining its relations with Russia. While many outside observers assume the two countries enjoy a close relationship, in reality it is highly complex. Although Iran and Russia have strong economic and military ties, Moscow is increasingly wary of Tehran’s growing ambitions ... And a nuclear Iran would significantly diminish Russia’s influence in the wider Caspian region that includes the Caucasus and Central Asia."