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