There is no argument about the Obama’s foreign policy that has not been leading anywhere but nowhere. Nonetheless when it comes to Iran, history shows this matter is apart from any presidency decision at a time, rather it is embedded within the long term policy of the U.S. governance system. This is because Iran has always been a critical point of geopolitical interest for the United States.
During the cold war era, as a resolution to stop the expansion of communism in the Middle East, U.S. along with its European allies, in a Conference in France in January 1979, came to conclusion to establish a green belt under the Soviet Union border by promoting and supporting the anti-atheist Islamic theocrats to take over the government in Iran. Since then the Mullahs’ regime has shown its extreme domestic and global atrocities in at least three fronts, act and support of terrorism, meddling in neighboring countries, and grave human rights violation against its own people.
During the past almost four decades, six U.S. presidents have been the bystanders of the regime’s shocking security threats across the region and the globe and yet not a single countermeasure against it has been instituted. Over time it has become more evident that such inaction and indifference of U.S. presidents has nothing to do with any individual U.S. government’s lack of will in responding to these unprecedented threats but has emanated in long term U.S. policies, which sought strategies far into future. These long term policies, per domestic and global necessities, are usually modified or changed over the course of a decade or so and has little to do with a single U.S. government’s dogma at a time.
About four decades of appeasing Iran policy has been carried out by six U.S. presidents. Regardless of the Iranian grassroots discontent, they have made all the supportive efforts they could to keep the mullahs’ regime well and alive. Why?, because firstly, the neocolonialism loves to deal with imbecilic Islamic mullahs whom at the very least, per their Sharia among other things, are against the nationalism, a key-code and an invitation card for an easy foreign aggression. And secondly, the apocalyptic IRI regime can easily be used as a wrecking ball to do the U.S. dirty job of destroying the region. How long this policy will continue? is it going to change at all? if so, when? All the evidence suggests that for no less than another term of the U.S. presidency, regardless of whoever is the next U.S. president, the ongoing chaos in Middle East is not only going to continue but will spread all over the region in general and to Iran in particular. Remember this is part of the long-term U.S. geopolitical strategy in the Middle East, which tends to change the current regional borders once established by the Sykes–Picot agreement, exactly a century ago. [DID]
At least now the betrayal is out in the open.
For years, Syria’s revolutionaries have suspected America’s lack of meaningful support for their uprising against dictator Bashar al-Assad was tied to President Barack Obama’s desire to re-engage with Iran.
Iran is Assad’s primary patron (though Russia, which has been bombing on his behalf since September, is a close second). Iran’s Revolutionary Guards are fighting in Syria, as are soldiers of Iran’s proxy Lebanese militia, Hezbollah, along with Shia irregulars from Afghanistan and Iraq whose passage to Syria Iran facilitates.
Defeat for Assad held the prospect of dramatically weakening Iran’s influence in the Middle East, a primary objective of U.S. foreign policy for decades—until Obama changed it.
In a remarkable New York Times Magazine profile, Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security advisor for strategic communications, does not explicitly link Obama’s abandonment of Syria with Washington’s outreach to Iran, but he frames the importance Obama placed on rapprochement with Iran in a way that makes it difficult to avoid concluding the two were connected. Read more…
Year after year U.S. State Department has issued its Human Rights report on Islamic regime of mullahs in Iran, in which every time a list of violations of personal and civil liberties, arbitrary arrest and detentions, tortures, disappearances, executions, discrimination, corruption and lack of transparency in government, etc, is enumerated. These reports are then transmitted to the U.S. Congress. One may ask whether these reports have had any upbeat effect on the regime’s code of conduct during the last almost four decades since the mullahs came to power in 1979! The answer is a big NO, there hasn’t been any positive change in the human rights record of the regime, quite the contrary the regime has become more violent in cracking down on its people. These reports are nothing more than bunch of rhetoric condemnation, which are easily ignored by the mullahs.
At best, the Congress initiates sets of sanctions against the IRI regime, however the records has shown that those sanctions have always been ineffective to stop mullahs from committing atrocities against its own people. The reason is transparent, the assigned sanctions are not of the smart type sanctions, smart sanctions are of political type that directly targets the main top leaders of the regime, bound by land, air, and water. In fact the U.S. sanctions against the regime are implied not to be smart because the West puppeteers are not willing to get rid of their puppets, the mullahs. The mullahs facilitate the World Powers’ plunder of Iran’s and Middle East’s natural wealth, promote the West’s economics through arm sales, and above all the apocalyptic regime will allow the West to use them as the wrecking ball to demolish the region by engaging in sectarian war. So why should the World Powers be willing to get rid of the mullahs?! Every year they release such a rhetoric condemnation report to fool the public but behind the curtain they express their commendation for such a rogue state, that is how the inhumane regime of IRI has survived for about 4 decades. [DID]
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a theocratic republic with a Shia Islamic political system based on “velayat-e faqih” (“guardianship of the jurist” or “rule by the jurisprudent”). Shia clergy, most notably the “supreme jurisprudent” (or supreme leader), and political leaders vetted by the clergy dominated key power structures. While mechanisms for popular election existed within the structure of the state, the supreme leader held significant influence over the legislative and executive branches of government (through various unelected councils under his authority) and held constitutional authority over the judiciary, the government-run media, and the armed forces. The supreme leader also indirectly controlled the internal security forces and other key institutions. Since 1989 the supreme leader has been Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In 2013 voters elected Hassan Rouhani president. Despite high popular participation following open debates, candidate vetting by unelected bodies based on arbitrary criteria and restrictions on the media limited the freedom and fairness of the election. In the last parliamentary elections in 2012, the government controlled candidate vetting and media reporting. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. Read more…
Over more than three-and-a-half decades, six U.S. presidents, under nine terms of presidency, one after another have been the bystanders to the crimes of the Mullahs’ regime against its own people, its active sponsorship of terrorism abroad, and its regional hegemonic role, and in turn have done nothing to confront and stop the evil act of such rogue state, Nothing! Zilch! Zero! On the contrary, they have cowardly sided with this evil. At some point one may think that the lack of bothered leaders by their conscience has sapped the will of governments in responding to these unprecedented acts of atrocity against humanity, but that cannot be the case, six presidents and all were inept leaders? No, that is not it.
The fact of the matter is that U.S. have been pursuing the long-standing policy of using the terrorist state (IRI) and non-state (ISIS, Al-Qaeda, etc) as wrecking balls to demolish the Middle East infrastructure by creating the sectarian war among Sunnis and Shia faction. United States along with its European allies not only do not confront the terrorism but directly and indirectly provide it with all the necessary vital economic and strategic instruments to keep it alive and active in its role of destroying the regional civility.
Such bulldozing will force the migration of local intellectual and patriotic societies to outside the regional borders; make the territory ready for non-resistant and easy plundering of its natural wealth by the greedy World Powers. By the same token, the fearful demolishing war is also used as a scarecrow for the neighboring states to benefit the World Powers by ordering humongous number of arms sales under the pretext of defense, thus providing a vehicle to promote their economy. The destruction of the region will continue until at some point the world community (i.e., UN) is forced to step in and present a plan to divide the territory into smaller states by imposing new borderlines. The new landscape of the Middle East map will of course preserve the geopolitical interests of the World Powers. The funny thing is that at the end of this chaos, which probably take a decade or two, these Great Powers will come back for reconstruction of the ruins of war, another way of economical scam.
Imperialism changes its version of presence but never fades away as long as there is no sincere resolute to end it. It becomes maleficent when combined with unfettered capitalism, turns a blind eye on humanity and ruins everything on its way to develop into an inhumane machine. [DID]
The barbaric terrorist attacks in Brussels were a clear reminder of the growing threat of Islamic extremism. This vicious ideology continues to take new forms – once al-Qaeda, now ISIS, both with the shared goal of creating an “Islamic state” capable of enforcing Sharia law and undermining the achievements of the civilized world.
While the Sunni version of fundamentalism desperately seeks to achieve this objective, the Shiite version in Tehran has been in place for nearly four decades. It should be confronted, not appeased.
Syria, Iraq, and Yemen have become breeding grounds for ISIS, a blessing in disguise for Tehran because it conveniently justifies the mullahs’ extraterritorial maleficence.
Some in the West continue to pin their hopes on elusive “reforms” within the clerical establishment, despite the fact that the Iranian regime’s regional agenda is, in the words of its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, “diametrically opposed” to that of the international community. Their optimism is fueled by the misguided expectation of political reform in the aftermath of the nuclear deal. Neither the facts nor the evidence support this contention. Read more…
In a recent article (posted at the end of this article) in The Guardian the writer criticizes the US congress for passing an amendment to remove the Visa Waiver program that would affect the travel of Iranians in diaspora to U.S., questioning why Iranian Americans should be punished and not the Saudis who were the ones who participated in 911 act of terrorism. Furthermore, the writer claimed that Iranians has never been part of any act of terrorism in the world, why they should be penalized. I couldn’t leave my comment on the article since the comment section was closed at the time, so I decided to post my reflection on the article in here.
In global communities’ point of view, a State is considered terrorist if its government is involved in an act of terrorism, and not by its people. And unfortunately when such State is considered as a terrorist State, its whole people are going to be tagged with label “terrorist” as a collateral damage. But the reverse is not true, for example in every democratic country such as an European country there are underground terrorists but that doesn’t label that country as a terrorist State, it is the same for a totalitarian regime like Saudi Arabia. Even though the participant Jihadists in 911 were mainly from Saudi Arabia but this act of terrorism was not counted on behalf of its government.
In case of Iran the issue is more complex. Iran is more than a terrorist State, it is considered as a rogue State. Read more…
The public executions in the Islamic regime of Iran has been used to cast fear and horror among the public, a tactic regime has been exercised to fortify its hold on power. It has also been used to create cruelty and inhumanity inside the community, but the Iranians who are the children of the Cyrus The Great, the one who introduced the principles of human rights to the humanity, have come to their senses and commenced a cultural movement to stand against the barbaric act of the regime and its Islamic retaliation punishment, this is the start of breaking the spell. [DID]
The noose awaits the neck of Balal. Photograph: Arash Khamooshi /Isna
When he felt the noose around his neck, Balal must have thought he was about to take his last breath. Minutes earlier, crowds had watched as guards pushed him towards the gallows for what was meant to be yet another public execution in the Islamic republic of Iran.
Seven years ago Balal, who is in his 20s, stabbed 18-year-old Abdollah Hosseinzadeh during a street brawl in the small town of Royan, Read more…
On many levels, Israel’s interception of the Klos-C arms ship was an exceptional feat of which we should be proud. It entailed the successful coordination and integration of multi-sourced information from intelligence bodies inside and outside the IDF.
Covert operations by special forces working hundreds of kilometers from home over the course of months were necessary to follow the circuitous route the Islamic Republic charted for the Chinese-made and Syrian-upgraded M-302 rockets. From Damascus to Tehran to Bandar Abbas, near Oman, and then back up the Persian Gulf to the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr, the shipment was carefully and clandestinely followed, until it was captured en route to Port Sudan where the plan, apparently, was to move the rockets by land from Sudan to Egypt and from Egypt to the Gaza Strip.
The navy commandos and other forces that took part in storming the cargo ship performed their jobs without a hitch. Klos-C’s crew was taken completely by surprise. Not a single person was injured. Read more…
I cannot believe that the US has started talking about the violation of human rights in Iran, am I dreaming or this is really happening! Iranian grassroots died waiting 3 and half decades for justice and nobody, I repeat nobody in the world have ever cared about them. All I can hope for is that this action of US department won’t ends to just enumerating the human rights violations by the IRI but behind this gesture is a sincere care for the oppressed people of Iran, a care for preserving democracy, a care to support the Iranian oppositions toward reaching freedom and justice. [DID]
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a theocratic republic established after the 1979 adoption of a constitution by popular referendum. The constitution, amended in 1989, created a political system based on the concept in Shia Islam of velayat-e faqih (“guardianship of the jurist” or “rule by the jurisprudent”). Shia clergy, most notably the “supreme jurisprudent” (or supreme leader), and political leaders vetted by the clergy-dominated key power structures. While mechanisms for popular election exist within the structure of the state, the supreme leader directly controlled the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government as well as the armed forces. The supreme leader also indirectly controlled internal security forces and other key institutions. Since 1989 the supreme leader has been Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Despite high popular participation in the country’s June 14 presidential election, candidate vetting conducted by unelected bodies based on arbitrary criteria, as well as limitations on civil society, print and electronic media, and election monitoring by credible nongovernmental observers, continued to undermine the freedom and fairness of the electoral system. Authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. Security forces frequently committed human rights abuses. Read more…
Iran has executed 40 people since the beginning of 2014, according to Amnesty International, with at least 33 carried out in the past week.The human rights organisation released a statement detailing 21 executions confirmed by Iranian officials, and another 19 that were reported through “reliable sources”.
“The spike in the number of executions carried out so far this month in Iran is alarming,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
Beginning on January 9, 2014, more executions were carried out in Iran than during the entire month last year, said the group.
The Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, who decisively won the national election in June 2013, promised to follow a “path of moderation” in international affairs and to ease restrictions on civil liberties. Read more…
The discussion over halting Iran‘s nuclear program, long a bipartisan matter, took an unfortunate and ugly turn two months ago, reaching a crescendo in recent days.
We refer to the White House’s ferocious and ongoing campaign to prevent Congress from pursuing new sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran. In short, the Obama administration believes that Congress, by passing new Iran sanctions, will blow up the agreement it reached in Geneva. To fend this off, the White House has been bellicosely characterizing anyone who supports new sanctions on Iran (or opposes the Geneva agreement, for that matter) as a dishonest warmonger.
It began November 12, when White House Press Secretary Jay Carney accused Congress of a “march to war” for considering new sanctions, an attack he repeated the next day. Shortly thereafter, President Obama himself more discreetly said, “If in fact we’re serious about trying to resolve this diplomatically,” then we should recognize that “military options are always messy.” Read more…
The enthusiastic media response to the election of the “moderate” and “reformist” Hassan Rouhani is reminiscent of the unrealistic drivel which greeted the “Arab Spring”. Indeed, there was perhaps greater justification for the misplaced optimism over the downfall of despotic Arab leaders than in the election of this Mullah, one of eight candidates approved by Ayatollah Khamenei from a pool of 686.
While Rouhani is far more sophisticated than his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (a Holocaust denier who continuously called for Israel to be wiped off the map), he is no moderate. Read more…
Last month, the Obama administration added seven new Iranian companies, because of proliferation concerns, to the ever-growing list of sanctioned Iranian entities. Yet, as important as this latest move is, one crucial category of Iranian entities is still missing from U.S. policy—companies owned or controlled by Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Despite his aura as the aloof religious guide of the Islamic Republic, Khamenei belongs to a long tradition of business savvy clerics. Like many of his predecessors, he has used his position of authority for his own personal enrichment. Since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, clerical foundations have developed into veritable business empires— thanks in part to political connections, but also due to a generous tax-exemption status. Many of these clerics, and other regime figures, owe their wealth to the supreme leader himself. Read more…