By Martin Love

Iran, whatever it further suffers, is going to win in the longer term

May 23, 2019

TEHRAN - To whom is Donald Trump answering? Ignorance at bottom. There is almost nothing he has not upset. He is like the proverbial bull in the world shop of china. But first, imagine. Imagine for example that Barack Obama had gotten a third term in the White House and carried on as President as he had during his second term.

First, it must be noted, Trump won the 2016 election arguably in significant part because he campaigned with a message of withdrawing the U.S. from overseas military engagements. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, had largely fomented the attacks on Libya and the destruction of that country – and bragged about it -- and also strongly supported and aided the infusion of arms and terrorists in to Syria and as well she helped devise the coup in Ukraine. She appeared relative to Trump in 2016 like some crazed crone hell-bent on revenge against the world for perceived, personal slights. (But still, had she won the election in 2016, it remains possible that she would have moderated her positions somewhat with respect to belligerent foreign policies.)

But back to Obama and the impossible third term. Had it materialized, he would have likely begun the withdrawal of the U.S. from Afghanistan. He would have maintained U.S. participation the JCPOA and, who knows, may have developed further accords with Iran. And he still did most all of what the craven and thoroughly unappreciative Zionists demanded of him (he’s Black, after all, and the Zionists and Trump supporters. many of them anyway, are racists). He gave billions of dollars and arms to Israel, but he likely would have also been making noises about the necessity that Israel eventually come to a fair agreement with the Palestinians, perhaps offering them equal rights west of the Jordan if not a viable state of their own on the West Bank. He would not have moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem nor cut humanitarian relief for the Palestinians.

The real question here is IF the U.S. were in difficult straits with respect to its maintenance “empire” in 2016, and it did not appear to be, it certainly seems to be now, and Trump and his advisors are the reason why. From economic sanctions, especially on Iran, to trade tariffs on China and sanctions on other countries, to the attempted but so far failed coup in Venezuela, and recent threats of war on the Mideast, there has never been a President so apparently determined to make the U.S. a rogue, out-of-control and hated menace to world peace. And opposition to the Zionists is mounting across the world like never before and also inside the U.S. So far, Iran seems to be making the best moves it possibly can under the circumstances.

President Rouhani has said he welcomes U.S. diplomatic overtures but has refused new diplomacy under the fact of economic sanctions and threats of military actions. He has chosen “resistance”. How does any head of state make deals with Trump who has destroyed previous deals like the JCPOA? How could the U.S. be trusted in the absence of anything but threats? How can Iran walk away entirely from the JCPOA without bringing down the wrath of the U.N. and other countries, including the other signatories to the JCPOA? It makes no sense for Trump to insist that Iran, displaying weakness and submission, call HIM for further negotiations.

From a tactical and logical standpoint, Iran’s leaders like President Rouhani have said they don’t want a war with the U.S. This goes without saying for any country, and as much as Bolton and Pompeo and Netanyahu and Muhammad Bin Salman and others may push for a U.S. attack on Iran, it’s hard to imagine that they don’t realize that even if Iran suffers mightily as a result of U.S. bombing, Israel and Saudi Arabia would also suffer mightily from any Iranian defensive retaliations, and so would the economies of every country on earth.

It seems apparent that the “maximum pressure” the U.S and its “allies” have inflicted on Iran cannot (logically anyway) have any other aim but to bring Iran to its knees with abject demands for relief from sanctions and threats. Trump and minions have made a truly absurd bet: that suffering Iranians would rise up against their government. If anything, Iranians are tighter with the extant government than they might otherwise be. Any desired internal reform on the part of Iran’s people will wait for expression on the absence of military threats and sanctions by outsiders.

In some odd respects, it may be fair to say that Iran comes out a winner no matter what the U.S. and allies do, although the “victory” should military attacks commence would in the end be largely pyrrhic. But still a victory. Trump simply does not understand Iran’s and the Iranian people’s capacity for sacrifice to maintain its sovereignty and independent political and social culture, whatever it may be. And Trump also seems to be ignorant that the U.S. has nothing but a handful of “allies” who are primarily posturing selfishly for themselves, not the U.S., unless they all have been rendered utterly daft by hubris.

At the least, it seems accurate to say that the U.S. has become desperate to shore up its flagging influence and its “empire”, and desperation or desperate moves are exactly the things that will prove to be counterproductive in the longer run. Iran has been around for almost 3000 years and is not ever going away even if it suffers, as if has often in the past, outrageous challenges.

Leave a Comment

1 + 3 =