jump to navigation

REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN February 21, 2012

Posted by wmmbb in CENTRAL ASIA, Middle East, Modern History.
Tags: ,
trackback

Perhaps it is the case that the Australian Government is subservient and supine in the face of  the American military-industrial complex, as John Pilger suggests, but it is clear that Iran is proactively responding to the pressures of global imperialism.

On RT, Brian Becker, the national director for ANSWER argues that the American objective in Iran is regime change, to turn back the clock to the post 1953 rule of the Shah:

The problem in such a project is that there is a tendency to telegraph your punches. For example, Lawrence Wilkerson has previously warned that the same script was been followed as lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

Juan Cole notes that Iran is defying the US and the EU by using oil as a strategic resource, which countries including India, China, South Korea and Japan need more that giving obeisance to the US Imperium, and by building coalitions with neighbours, such as nuclear-powered Russia and Pakistan. I imagine that external pressure, including the terrorist murder of scientists would consolidate domesticate support. If so, the strategy is either not working, or it has not had time.

Tom Burghardt argues Washington, both behind the scenes and with the usual crude displays of threat power/violence is ramping up the pressure. Yet Iran is being proactive in its so far cool,cerebral responses. For example, it sent two ships into the Mediterranean, contrasting with the US presence in the Persian Gulf. This would appear to be more symbolic that real because it was suggested that armed vessels would not have been allowed through the Suez Canal.

In response to the EU ban, Iran has halted their oil exports to France and the UK ahead of the set deadline, suggesting that the ban was a shadow play on behalf of the Europeans, and may rebound against them given rising prices and restrictions of supply. If Israel, were to attack Iran, then presumably Saudi Arabia may be placed in a difficult position as to whether to support Iran.

Al Jazeera reports that Iran will again be hosting the IEAE – something that Israel has never done. They report:

A delegation from the UN nuclear watchdog has arrived in Iran on Monday for talks aimed at defusing international tensions over the country’s atomic programme.

“We hope to have a couple of good and constructive days in Tehran,” Herman Nackaerts, deputy-director general of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said at Vienna airport as the five-member team prepared to depart.

“The highest priority remains of course the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear programme,” he told reporters, making clear he wanted to see concrete results in the talks with Iranian officials.

Western diplomats have downplayed any hopes of a major breakthrough during the two-day talks, even though it comes just a few days after signs of a possible opening for diplomacy in the long-running nuclear dispute.

The outcome, after an inconclusive first round of discussions last month, could determine whether the international standoff over Iran’s uranium enrichment programme escalates further or offers scope to reduce tensions.

Iran denies Western allegations that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons but its refusal to curb uranium enrichment work, which it says is for civilian purposes, has raised concerns.

Ali Akbar Salehi, the Iranian foreign minister said his country was keen to quickly resume talks with world powers, once a place and date were agreed.

The last talks collapsed in Istanbul in January 2011, but Tehran has responded positively to an EU offer to look at reviving them.

“We are looking for a mechanism for a solution for the nuclear issue in a way that it is win-win for both sides,” Salehi said.

But he added that Iran remained prepared for a “worst-case scenario.”

These war games and their associated pressures and tensions are inherently very dangerous, and therefore do not reflect well on their principle perpetrators. The historical comparison with what happened with Iraq is instructive. The very fact that Iran has been able to respond proactively and to draw together global alliances, sometimes implicit and other times explicit, as for example the support from Pakistan and Afghanistan, means that the play will not unfold as before. The staging has been changed by the Arab Spring and by the awareness of the immediate past. Now it is proving more contentious for the the United States to act as the global hegemon, even with the support of the Europeans, despite the short-term success in Libya.

Comments»

No comments yet — be the first.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 43 other followers

%d bloggers like this: