Friday, February 28, 2014

Response to a Middle East Question

The Question:

What are the most critical threats in Iran for the US? Regime implosion, nuclear proliferation, regional destabilization? Like Tyler, who also focused on Israel, the situation in the Middle East begs the question of how sustainable is the non-resolution of the conflict with Palestinians and how the outcome of the Syrian civil war will affect regional balance.

The Response:

I do not see any of these as true critical threats to the U.S. Just because Israel claims that Iran wants nuclear weapons, it does not make it a proven fact. From all of the UN speeches, interviews and letters to American Presidents (Bush and Obama), there is nothing pointing to an ambition for nuclear weapons on behalf of the Itanian regime in my opinion. This is the same political trickery that Israel and AIPAC used to achieve sanctions and eventual regime removal from Iraq paid for by the American tax dollar and American blood. Sadly, the private sector went along with it because war and occupation equals profit.

Ahmadinejad's Letter to Bush (2006)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/09/AR2006050900878.html

Ahmadinejad's Letter to Obama (2008)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/06/AR2008110603030.html

Ahmadinejad's final UN speech (2012)

http://www.policymic.com/articles/15364/mahmoud-ahmadinejad-un-general-assembly-speech-video-translation-full-transcript

Hassan Rouhani's first UN speech (2013)

http://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-hasan-rouhanis-speech-at-the-un/

CBS report on Fatwa issued by Iran's Supremem Leader against Nuclear weapons:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-religious-decree-against-nuclear-weapons-is-binding/


As for the other two options, I do not thing regime implosion is not an high percentage threat to Iran. Even though the government of Iran is based on an Islamic constitution, it possesses quite a bit of democratic values to it (argumentively more than the representative democracy of the U.S.). I don't see how Iran can destablize the region because they are not the aggressors in the region, that role is held by Israel and sadly the United States who have removed regimes from Iraq and Afghanistan, have funded and armed opposition to the democratically elected government in Syria, funded multiple vying parties in Egypt since the ousting of Mubarak, and were major contributors to the removal of Ghaddafi in Libya. So, who is the aggressor in the region (regardless if that aggression is portrayed as spreading justice, freedom and democracy)? It doesn't look like Iran is a regional aggressor to me. How many states have they invaded? Iran signed the NPT long ago while Israel has never been held accoutable by the west to do so (and they do have nuclear weapons).

In response to the Israeli-Palestinian (so-called) conflict and Syria, the only respone I can provide is that the west allows Israel to break international laws in settlement building and ethnic cleansing, military occupation and the naval blockade of the Palestinian territories.....only to be protected by the American veto in the UNSC. Again, who is the agressor here? Why is the U.S. so interested in funding opposition to Assad in Syria? Because Assad's regime trades with Iran? It seems that it is all interconnected to maintaining regional hegemony.

2014 Amnesty International Report on Israeli aggression:

http://www.amnesty.org/03EB4116-1E89-4215-91F3-2B1059DF5AB5/FinalDownload/DownloadId-3EF0738C4E152464BC15852028C96650/03EB4116-1E89-4215-91F3-2B1059DF5AB5/en/library/asset/MDE15/002/2014/en/349188ef-e14a-418f-ac20-6c9e5c8d9f88/mde150022014en.pdf

Israeli Human Rights Video confession of an IDF solider:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gfJZ9jkkeo

It is slightly difficult to determine rational foreign policy for the U.S. while the mainstream (force-fed) media distortion of facts impacts the public view and the Senators and Representatives in the U.S. Congress continuously exchange national integrity for individual political longevity and economic benefits.

J. Meeks

No comments:

Post a Comment