Some Final Thoughts:
Although I said and wrote repeatedly in the past that
the US stance toward Iran will not change, by now it should be obvious to all
that this is the case. American
“thanked” Iran by imposing further sanctions on Iran for its defense
capabilities – the ballistic missiles.
If we all share a common dream of some balance in this
world, which would hopefully lead to more security for all, here is what must
happen.
With the nuclear-related UNSC sanctions against Iran
lifted, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SC)) must IMMEDIATELY include
Iran in the SCO as a full member.
While some Iranian ‘reformists’ have written that
‘America needs Iran’, the truth of the matter is a more just and balanced world
needs Iran, foremost Russia and China.
The United States has not abandoned its aspirations of becoming a global
hegemon. The US has never sought peace. Peace and expansion/domination are incompatible.
In 1941, Isaiah Bowman, a key figure in the Council on Foreign
Relations wrote: “The measure of our
victory will be the measure of our domination after victory." True
to this, after the Cold War, Prominent Americans such as Wolfowitz and Rustow
opined that it was important to contain Russia (the Heartland – Defense
Planning Guideline 1992, 1993). It was
felt that the domination of the
Heartland (Eastern Europe, Russia, Central Asia) would lead to the domination
of the World. Events in the past
several years confirm the implementation stages of the plan.
As recently
as April, 2015, during a speech at the Army War College Strategy
Conference, Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work elaborated on how the Pentagon
plans to counter the three types of wars supposedly being waged by Iran,
Russia, and China. These goals have been
facilitated with the Nuclear Deal. Let
us consider.
In 1998,
Clinton’s national security agenda made it clear that unhampered access to
Nigerian oil and other vital resources was a key US policy. In early 2000s,
Chatham House was one of the publications that determined African oil would be
a good alternate to Persian Gulf oil IN CASE OF OIL DISRUPTION.This followed a
strategy paper for US to move toward African oil. Push for African oil was on
Dick Cheney’s desk on May 31, 2000. In
2002, the Israeli based IASPS
suggested America push toward African oil.
In the same year Boko
Haram was ‘founded’.
In 2007, AFRICOM
helped consolidate this push into the region.
The 2011, a publication titled: “Globalizing
West African Oil: US ‘energy security’ and the global economy” outlined ‘US
positioning itself to use military force to ensure African oil continued to
flow to the United States’. This was but one strategy to supply oil in
addition to or as an alternate to the passage of oil through the Strait of
Hormuz.
Enter Yemen. To understand the geopolitics of
the Saudi war against Yemen, it is imperative to read “The
Geopolitics Behind the War in Yemen: The Start of a New Front against Iran”
written by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya.
Nazemroaya correctly states: “[T] he US wants to make sure that it could
control the Bab Al-Mandeb, the Gulf of Aden, and the Socotra Islands. The Bab
Al-Mandeb it is an important strategic chokepoint for international maritime
trade and energy shipments that connects the Persian Gulf via the Indian Ocean
with the Mediterranean Sea via the Red Sea. It is just as important as the Suez
Canal for the maritime shipping lanes and trade between Africa, Asia, and
Europe.”
In 2012, several
alternate routes to Strait of Hormuz were identified which at the time of
the report were considered to be limited in capacity
and more expensive. However,
collectively, the West African oil and control of Bab Al-Mandeb would diminish
the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz in case of war.
A very important consideration is the stark fact that the
fallout from bombing an operating uranium enrichment facility with several
hundred kilograms of enriched uranium would create an environmental catastrophe
which would dwarf all nuclear accidents to date killing
millions of people. The Iran
Nuclear Deal greatly reduces the scope of the ensuing disaster should such
steps be taken.
All this is of course speculation.
There is no doubt that the primary goal of the United States is to
install a Washington friendly compliant regime in Iran. But if they fail? Has Washington spent billions of dollars to undermine
and destroy the Iranian revolution only to change its mind? Isn’t this the same scenario we hoped would
be the outcome of the end of the Cold War only to learn that Washington
continued a covert war against Russia?
