As the Title suggests this examines the Quote from a 2002 Speech by an American President to one from a British Foreign Secretary a couple of days ago.
More recently, things have escalated even further as a US Carrier Group makes it's way towards the Gulf. This is how several Scenarios lead to WW3.
From "Axis of Evil" to being "on the Brink".
So how did we get here?
The recent Protests and State response in Iran which has caused the current Crisis where Diplomatic Missions in the middle East are evacuated and the West readies for War with Iran did not happen in a vacuum and started years ago with GWB.
Even the AI on Google agrees in response to the Question: "Did "Axis of Evil" cause the conservative backlash in Iran?" here was the response......
"Yes, George W. Bush’s foreign policy, most notably his 2002 "Axis of Evil" speech, is widely credited with fueling a conservative backlash in Iran that crippled the domestic reformist movement.
Key impacts of the Bush administration's approach include:
Empowerment of Hardliners: Bush's rhetoric provided Iranian radical Islamists with a powerful political weapon to use against their modernist rivals. By framing the U.S. as a persistent existential threat, conservatives revived militant revolutionary language and sidelined reformists like President Mohammad Khatami.
Stalling Reform: The "Axis of Evil" label was viewed by Iranian political elites as a "betrayal" of the cooperation Iran had provided during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. This shift eroded the ability of reformists to argue for transparency or moderation in foreign and domestic policies.
The "Axis of Evil" Impact: The speech sparked immediate outrage across Iran's political spectrum, uniting both reformists and conservatives in condemnation. Analysts note that while public support for reform remained high, the conservative "Old Guard" successfully used the perceived American hostility to seize the political initiative.
Long-term Shift: This backlash contributed to the eventual rise of hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005, marking a significant departure from the more cooperative era sought by reformists earlier in the decade."
So the Situation in Iran that threatens to draw the whole World into WW3 began 24 years ago with a Speech by the US President of the time.
Something many of us have been very critical of in the years since.
What I'm saying here is a reformed Iran was exactly what the Iranians were working towards 25 years ago - without the risk of a regional, or even a global, War - until their task was made next to impossible by a misguided and ignorant Speech by an American President in 2002.
A Speech that ignored recent History the Presidents own Father was involved in.
To lump Iran in with Iraq was extremely erroneous given how they had fought a brutal War with each other in the 1980's - during which America and others supported Saddam. Iran remained neutral during the 1990/1 Gulf War and did not support Saddam at all.
To compare them to North Korea was even more erroneous as it ignored the Fact that traditionalist Muslims don't like Communists. This was exactly why America supported the Mujahedin in Afghanistan as they fought the "Communist Infidels" of the Soviet Union and their own Government. Or why the Soviets supported the Marxist Government in Kabul and were fearful of the Islamic States in their own backyard.
Both Foreign Policies happened when GWB's Father was the American Vice President.
24 years later you have an Iraq where many Shia Muslims are as loyal to Tehran as they might be Baghdad, an Iran who now probably does have dealings with a Nuclear North Korea, and a Geopolitical Alliance with both Russia and China.
Instead of a reformed Iran that could have happened without Bloodshed.
And one that doesn't now face the Risk of Civil War like the one that raged in Syria for nearly 15 years. Except this one would happen in a Country that could sever the Persian Gulf from the rest of the World, flatten pro-Western Arab States, severely damage Israel, and is far bigger and geopolitically far more significant to their Allies.
The Chinese angle .......
A lot of gung ho Idiots might think that putting pressure on Iran acts as a choke point to China but Chinese Oil imports from the Gulf Region amounted to half it's total Oil imports in 2024.
Any destabilisation in Iran threatens to render the Straits of Hormuz completely unnavigable which would include Shipping to China from all the Gulf States. Would Beijing tolerate such a huge disruption to its Supply?
The gung ho Lunatics might think it's a good thing if that happened, but here's why it wouldn't be.......
China supplies America with 50% of the USA's medical needs including essentials like Gauze, protective supplies and basics like Ibuprofen.
The EU is even more dependent - relying on China for up to 95% of its ingredients for Drugs like Anti Biotics.
There are many other Areas of Industry where China has become a huge supplier of Goods - from electrical and consumer Goods to EV's, Telecoms and heavy engineering - and while importers are trying to become less dependant on Chinese Products it won't happen overnight, Factories, Foundries and retooling can take years to develop, while the resulting economic conflict would merely add to the Tension.
And this doesn't include the growing standoff involving Taiwan, the world's biggest supplier of microprocessors.
All of this at a time when supply chains are under more strain than they have ever been since WW2.
If People think Price increases have been steep in the last 4 years what might they be if the Situation in Iran escalated?
None of this helped by what is happening in Venezuela and elsewhere.
In both "Threads" and "Countdown to Looking Glass" - Films that deal with the Preamble to Nuclear War the Scenarios start in Iran, but the Threat now is more real than even the most realistic of Films.
America was always worried about the Soviet Union taking control of Iran's Oil - which is why they deposed Iran's leader Mohammed Mossadegh and installed the Shah. They continued to supply Iran with Weapons until the Islamic Revolution toppled the Shah'ist Regime in 1979, after which they were concerned that the Soviets would move on Tehran to establish Geopolitical and economic Links.
Russia now has very firm links with Iran - being the main provider of Nuclear Technology - while Iran has supplied Moscow with Weapons used in the War in Ukraine. A lot of this in response to western Foreign Policy with both Countries. In better times Russia acted as guarantor to Iranian compliance with the JCPOA Treaty. As the Situation deteriorated that no longer applies.
WW2 started with Conflicts in various Parts of the World gradually merging with each other, from the Far East to North Africa, Spain then the rest of Europe - and finally America.
We are seeing the same thing happening gradually now and Tensions don't seem to be easing. Conflicts in Eastern Europe, North Africa, the Arctic Circle, the Far and Middle East and Latin America.
Unfortunately any World War resulting from these won't end with Victory Street Parties in Trafalgar and Times Square, or Red and Tiananmen Square depending in which side you are on.
They will end with nothing - because no one will win and everyone loses everything.
And also ........ How about the Iranian People themselves?
Given what happened in Iraq after Saddam and the brutal Pogroms against Alawite Muslims and Christians in Syria after the collapse of the Assad Government has anyone considered what could happen in Iran if the same thing is done there?
Alawites - including Women and Children - were slaughtered in Syria by Agents of the HTS Government even though they had nothing to do with the Assad Regime. Christians were murdered despite Jolani's assurances of religious Pluralism. So how about Iran after 46 years in it's current form and anyone who is accused of being involved with the Government? Given the Slaughter in Syria would the new Regime bother to establish Guilt or Innocence?
Then there was what happened in Iraq after Saddam, where Maliki's Government imposed discriminatory Laws against Sunni Muslims regardless of any or no involvement in the Ba'ath Party.
They endured everything from suspected Complicity to accusations of Terrorism and lost many Rights including those to their own Property.
The potential for a terrible Pogrom in Iran should the Government fall is quite real and could kill, maim and displace 100's of 1000's.
It seems the historical Amnesia applies to even more recent Phenomena......
ReplyDeleteWhile on her visit to Finland Yvette Cooper said how Russian Ships were responsible for destroying essential undersea Infrastructure like electricity and internet Cables and Pipelines. Maybe someone should remind her that the most devastating Attack on Fuel Infrastructure in the Baltic Sea wasn't done by the Russians at all and Nord Streams demise has caused severe economic disruption and hardship for People in western Europe.
She went on to say that President Trump could be diverted away from the Situation in Gaza by events in both Iran and Venezuela. That we should concentrate on sending Aid to the stricken enclave to help during the Winter Months.
The Palestinians had been getting Aid from UNWRA for Decades until Israel stopped allowing them Access to Gaza a year ago, during the last Winter.
Anyone stupid enough to think that a War with Iran putting pressure on China by curtailing it's Oil supply is a good idea should also remember that about 70% of all Goods traded on Amazon comes from there. Only 25-30% comes from America and elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteSo what would happen to Amazon if that 70% of Goods became unavailable? The impact on the global Economy should Amazon cease to exist has been compared to that of an earthquake. Everything from millions of lost Businesses to a Stock market Crash, mass unemployment and millions of People losing a side Income that might help them through the current Cost of Living. Crisis.
And even if the impossible was achieved and all the manufacturing for this and everything else mentioned or otherwise was relocated to America and Europe a lot of the basic Resources to make anything come from China.
It's like the Attitude in Europe - particularly Germany - that forgot how Russian Fuel powered it's manufacturing base. The EU might boast that it has a higher GDP than Russia but that was due to the Fuel it got from the Russians. The Ukraine War saw an end to this guaranteed cheap and reliable Fuel. Ironic given why the Russo-German Nord stream partnership was formed.
Meanwhile, what about Iran?
The Fate of the Strait of Hormuz could be either/or.
If Government loyalists prevailed in south east Iran they might close the Seaway to do severe damage to western/NATO economies that rely on Fuel shipped through there. If it fell to the Rebels they might do the same to damage Tehran's Chinese Allies. The Passage is only 21 Miles wide at it's narrowest, which is about the same as the English Channel. During WW2 German and British Heavy Guns fired at each other for most of the War, damaging Ports, Ships and Towns on each side. It became known as "Hellfire Corner", and this was in an Era before guided Missiles and Drones. Look at what the Houthis did to the Red Sea and Eliat with their comparatively cheap Projectiles.
As it starts to look like there might be western Intrigue involved in the 'Protests' in Iran - which looks like a repeat of Syria 2011 or Ukraine 2014 - maybe they're were pissed in Washington 24 years ago that Iranians wanted Reforms in Iran's image, not those of America. Or that the Whitehouse refused to acknowledge any of it until they had some involvement in it. It does seem strange that the President is so protective of 'Protesters' in Iran in 2026 when America has all but ignored those of elsewhere. Indeed, when People protested in Bahrain a few years ago Washington came down on the side of the Government.
ReplyDeleteI can't recommend this Film emphatically enough given what is happening now ......
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/D7CT6fcZI64?si=lXtvVFOZP_9P33YM
There were things the Media of the time didn't exactly fall over themselves to tell you at the start of this Century.
ReplyDeleteOne being how Iran had been helping the Coalition in western Afghanistan to fight Taliban and Al Qaida in the year or so before the unfortunate Speech. That they were as committed as everyone else to fight Terrorism.
The other was how Qassem Soleimani - the former Iranian Defence Chief who was assassinated during Trump #1 - had arranged a Meeting with White House Staff to discuss Plans to fight Terrorist Groups but the Americans refused to attend.
What western Media and Politicians ought to have been doing during that time was building on this Spirit of cooperation.
By alienating the Iranians not only did they set in motion what we have now they also shattered their own Consensus which emerged in the aftermath of 9/11.
To: President Donald J Trump.
ReplyDelete1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington
DC 25000
Dear Mr President.
Might I respectfully remind you that the Iranians had a "Nuclear Deal" with America and other Signatories - the P5+1 of the Security Council.
It was called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA.
They had, and had kept to, this since it was reached in July 2015, until America withdrew in May 2018.
Weren't all Parties in negotiations to restore it in June 2025, until proceedings were interrupted by an Assault first by Israel and then America?
How can any Negotiations be done in any good faith while this happens?
This could be asked by anyone trying to negotiate anything, including your Predecessor President Franklin Delano Roosevelt when he was negotiating with the Japanese in December 1941.
Respectfully yours.
While that Fleet is in the Persian Gulf the Americans should spare us the Crocodile Tears for Reforms in Iran.
ReplyDeleteTheir 'concern' for any Reformers today is as empty and hollow as it was for them 25 years ago - when Iran was doing exactly that - and for any in Iraq whose subsequent Wars killed and mained 100's of 1000's of People.
It's the same with Syria which went through more than a Decade of Trauma only to be run by Al Qaida. A broken Bottle in the Face of anyone who fought them in Afghanistan (including Iranians) and Iraq and the many 1000's who died as 'collateral Casualties' in that Fighting.
Iran currently has a Reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian whose job is made as difficult as it was for Mohammed Khatami and for similar Reasons. A Masoud Pezeshkian who was in Negotiations when he was attacked in June last year.
And if any War on Iran escalates to global Nuclear Conflict - which many have said it could including me - any Talk of "reforms" anywhere is completely meaningless.
It's also starting to look to anyone paying attention that, as far as some western Countries are concerned, including Israel, Countries like Iran aren't allowed to reform unless it's in the image of those western Countries. Even Gaddafi in Libya was having meetings with Prime Minister Tony Blair not long before he was deposed with a lot of western and NATO intrigue. Once one of the wealthiest Countries in Africa is now wrecked by the Civil Wars that raged there and the Warlords who now run some of it.
If a Country reforms without that War or Intrigue the West can't apply the usual Rhetorics about Authoritarianism and Regime that it always uses.
It was the same with the Palestinians when Israel began supporting a new Organisation called Hamas. Not anti-Zionist propaganda as Articles in the the Times of Israel and the Analyst corroborate this.
They did it to undermine secular Palestinians like the PLO who were gradually becoming malleable to Negotiations with the Israelis. Yasur Arafat finally recognised Israel's existence, but by then Hamas had become a powerful player in Palestinian Affairs. After Arafat died his Successor Massoud Abbas had become so compromised so as not to be taken seriously by most Palestinians to the benefit of Hamas.
This suits the Israeli Agenda because they use it to legitimise their War on the Palestinians.
Something they couldn't do if there was a more conciliatory Power in charge.
Anyone genuinely concerned about Reforms in Iran should ask what life might be like for those Iranians who supported them were it not for the "Axis of Evil" Gaffe?
ReplyDeleteBut then, anyone genuinely concerned about the "War on Terrorism" should ask what Afghanistan might have been like in 2021 had Iran not been alienated by the Gaffe and continued their Work in the western Borderlands of the Country? Not only might things have been a lot easier to contain and confronting the Taliban and Al Qaida more effective, we might also have not seen the Rout that happened that year.
Internal Reforms are always better than an external Foist.
ReplyDeleteThe Reforms Iran were attempting 25 years ago were at their own Volition so, while they might have had some internal Opposition, they can be seen as a genuine wish of the People for modernisation. It was the same when Masoud Pezeshkian was elected recently as a Departure from the previous Leadership of Ebrahim Raissi.
What the West should have done 25 years ago is support these Movements, but do so so as not to create the Impression that these were in any way Puppet Governments.
It's the difference between someone like Khatami in Iran and Ahmed Chalabi in Iraq.
The western Approach isn't just confined to Iran and other Arab Countries either
ReplyDeleteYou only have to see what Eurocentric Western Hubris and American interference did to a Ukraine they expected to abandon 1200 years of History and Heritage.
The claims to want Reform is as inconsistent as the Green Lobby that wants renewable Energy from Lithium in Ukraine's disputed Regions, and is prepared to fight a severely ecologically damaging War to obtain it.
Meanwhile, even if a War in the Gulf didn't escalate to a global Nuclear Conflict or even a shooting War that spreads to other Regions the Impact any disruption to the World's Fuel and Energy Supply would be catastrophic.
And even more devastating that either World War because far more of the World is much more dependent on Oil than it was 80 and 107 years ago.
Railways ran on Coal, many Ships still had Coal Turbines as did lot of the World's Power Stations.
Electricity Consumption from the latter was also considerably less.
During and long after World War 2 many People in the developed World still lived like they did in the 1920's and 30's.
A lot of Agriculture in some of the Worlds most populated Regions like India, Indonesia and China along with a lot of Asia and most of Africa and Latin America still used Livestock to pull Wagons and Ploughs.
Some Gulf States like the United Arab Emirates must have realised this and refused to support the American War Effort on Iran.
All this at a time when everything is under more strain that it has ever been.
And you wouldn't have to close the Straits of Hormuz or Red Sea to cause a global Fuel and Energy Crisis.
ReplyDeleteWhat Sea Captain of a civilian Ship, or it's owner is going to sail into the Gulf or Red Sea when a shooting War is going on? How many Insurance Companies would even allow them to?
The huge Oil Tankers and LNG Ships particularly are very vulnerable and while Donald Trump's Aircraft Carriers might sustain several Strikes before sinking it would only take a single Drone or Missile to do the same to the former. Given the intensity of the fighting and Weapons exchange the chance of that happening is very likely.
How can Trump guarantee that won't happen?
He can't.
While some Arab Countries have refused certain types of Support for the American and Israeli War Plans (closing Airspace, not allowing Facilities to be used etc) maybe they know what this means for the Region even if the Americans pretend they don't.
Americas recent Activities in Venezuela prompt questions about what comes next
If a War with Iran effectively ruins the Arab World - via it's Oil Economy - Venezuela has the biggest Deposits in the World. If America then acquires those Reserves they can then sell them to the rest of a World that used to buy it from the Arabs.
If People think this is impossible one only has to see what they have done to their European Allies. Effectively severing their Supply of cheap Fuel from Russia and selling them theirs at anything up to 6 times the amount.
Meanwhile, it beggars belief that the IRGC have become a proscribed Organisation - in other words Terrorists.
These are the same People who fought Al Qaida and the Taliban in western Afghanistan and whose Quds Forces fought ISIS in Iraq. They made a sizable contribution to putting an end to some of the terrible things being done that even Saddam didn't do and helped stabilise the Country after a bloody Civil War.
What it also says to Tehran is there's no point in any Negotiations once your Sovereign Army has been tagged like this because they no longer recognise your Legitimacy.
It also helps legitimise any War against them because it side steps any international Laws on War against a sovereign State. You also don't have to obtain any UN Mandate because you are now fighting "Terrorists" rather than an Army.
It suggests that a lot of the Talk about "Negotiations" and a "Deal" doesn't contain much substance and the decision to go to war has already been made.
Given that it was announced by Kaja Kallas the European Union Vice President there will be no interlocution or concerns raised by the EU.
The Days of Politicians like Gerhard Schroeder and Jacques Chirac are long gone in Europe.
No Gulf State - however neutral - is going to be able to affordably export Oil while a War exists with America and Israel against Iran. It would be extremely dangerous for any Shipping to sail through it, particularly while Sanctions busting Russian Ships are being intercepted. Suddenly no Ship would be above suspicion and the potential for Chaos is huge.
ReplyDeleteShipping Insurance Companies are very strict about Vessels sailing in Warzones and charge very high Premiums for any that do, while Crews and Owners would be reluctant to do so anyway.
So, Iran might not have to seal off the Straits of Hormuz for this to happen. The mere fact that the Area has become a Warzone will do this.
You only have to look at what happened in the Black Sea and how "Grain Corridors" had to be negotiated to allow Ships to carry Ukrainian Produce to the rest of the World. All Ships were at risk - not just Russian and Ukrainian ones - while we're seeing the impact on Food Prices everywhere.
The subsequent Cost of Living Crisis has devoured People's Incomes, Welfare, Pensions and Life Savings enough as it is without this extra Layer of Disruption.
And should we all now thank Kaja Kallas for advancing the further Demise of International Law?
ReplyDeleteThanks to the proscribing of the IRGC by her European Union the Iranians have retaliated by dubbing all European Armies as "Terrorists". This further diminishes their (EU Troops) Legitimacy in the Opinions of any Areas that might support Iran and even some neutral ones.
Her announcing the Proscribement would be like someone in 1970's-90's Britain confusing the Irish Free State Army with the Provisional IRA or the British Army with one of the Loyalist Paramilitary Groups.
It shows a complete lack of understanding of Iran and the most basic Nuances on the Subject.
The IRGC are part of the mainstream Iranian Military and some aspects of it even more significant. The IRGC Navy is Iran's main Force in the Gulf for example.
Her timing couldn't be any worse either. All it has done is make a toxic situation even more poisonous and if there are any 'negotiations' the task is made even more difficult than it already is.
Imagine if Kennedy had accused the KGB of being "Terrorists" in October 1962!
This is made no better by it being difficult to believe anything President Trump says.
Not only is this the President who abandoned the JCPOA, it's the same one who told us in June last year that Iran's 'Nuclear Weapons' Program had been utterly destroyed by the American B2 Assault that month.
So either the Facilities were destroyed - or why the hoopla about them now?
But then, the Ambiguity of their existence at all is because of him and the ending of the JCPOA.
Also, of course, what happened in June last year did so the last time Iran was in Talks with America. There's probably some acerbic Humour on the Streets of Tehran now saying; if you want to be attacked by Israel or the US start negotiating with them.
Particularly after Israel assassinated Hamas Negotiator Ismail Haniyeh.
I'm not naive and realise that Iran does everything with their own Agenda, but there are ways you should go about dealing with them and ways you shouldn't. Western and Israeli Leaders have thus far done the latter.
Iran has now summoned all EU Ambassadors to protest at the proscribing of IRGC as "Terrorists".
ReplyDeleteKaja Kallas couldn't have timed it any worse when she announced the EU had done this.
In an already strained diplomatic Climate where Negotiations to try and end the Crisis are flimsy at best this does nothing to defuse it. Tehran might ask for clarification on the Comments and how it relates to President Trump and the US military build up in the Gulf.
Imagine if JFK had called the KGB "Terrorists" during the very fraught diplomatic Wrangle during the Cuban missile Crisis, or Khrushchev said same about the CIA. It would have killed off any chance of a Settlement and started a Conflict.
As anyone in the Gulf Region would tell Ms Kallas; you don't put Petrol on an already dangerous Conflagration.
I would like to reiterate the original premise of this Post about how Iran's Reformist Movement was sacrificed in a ham fisted and badly informed popularist Speech by an American President 24 years ago. Eager to capitalise on 9/11 GWB - or at least his Speechwriter - ignored the Nuances of Iran's political scene at the time and gave the Agenda to the conservative Backlash that happened because of it.
ReplyDeleteFast forward to 2026 and we have apparent Protests which seem to have been hijacked by armed Provocateurs who created Street Battles and actual Small Arms exchanges resulting in many 100's of Deaths. People who might still be alive if the Gun Men had stayed away.
But as I've mentioned Iran was set on a Course of Reforms a quarter of a Century ago that would have yielded considerable Results had they not been interrupted and scuppered by that Speech.
But then, the Number of Deaths - which depends on who you believe either way - could pale into insignificance if President Trump does launch his Assault on Iran.
Unless Smart Weapons have become so clever they can distinguish between a Reformist and a Conservative a lot of those killed will be the former.
Last year Iran elected a Reformist whose Mandate is to do exactly what the Protestors are asking for, but while Khatami's Job was made next to impossible by GWB's Speech, Mr Pezeshkian's Task was severely set back by the Attacks by Israel and America.
In recent Hours Mr Pezeshkian might have commissioned Emissaries to bolster Negotiations with American Representatives, but given what happened last year he probably also mobilised Iranian Civil Defence and distributed Food and Medical supplies.
ReplyDeleteWhat is intriguing is how - before meeting the Iranians - US Envoy Stephen Witkoff will be visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Is this to glean the Israeli Perspective on the Negotiations or to reiterate Israel's demand for a triple Agreement with Iran?
Stop any Nuclear enrichment Program.
Stop supporting other anti-Israeli Groups in the Region
Scrap ballistic Missiles.
This could backfire on the Process as Iran sees Witkoff as an Emissary for Israel as much as America.
Meanwhile, a couple of things have happened which should be examined....
An Iranian Shaheed 139 Drone was allegedly shot down by F35's as it was seen approaching the USS Abraham Lincoln. Why it was there hasn't been confirmed, but given that that Drone can be used for Reconnaissance it isn't inconceivable or unreasonable to suggest it was sent to monitor the huge US Navy presence in the Region.
Also, several Iranian Boats tried intercepting an American flagged Tanker in the Straits of Hormuz.
Apparently they ordered it to stop and requested it be boarded but the Ship continued. The Straits are very narrow and it could have been in or very close to Iranian Waters.
Both Incidents can't be at all surprising as Iran tries to protect it's Territory by either reconnoitring potentially hostile Military Assets or wanting to question Crews of any Vessels from a potentially belligerent Nation. That Ship was similarly flagged to the huge military Fleet so why wouldn't the Iranians regard it with Suspicion?
During the Missile Crisis American Planes flew very close to Soviet Ships approaching the quarantine Zone, wanting to know what they were carrying, while Reconnaissance flights were sent over San Christobel in Cuba.
Anyone who remembers the Cold War might remember those Spy Ships sailing of our Coast in the North Sea.
All of this is why the Situation is very tense and the more it continues the riskier it gets.
It should also be remembered that the US Navy were demanding Soviet Ships stop and be boarded for inspection in 1962. They would be addressed asking to do so in Russian, while there were even plans to shoot and disable the Rudders of Ships that wouldn't stop, and Soviet Submarines were being depth charged
ReplyDeleteThis was being done much further away from Cuba than the American Tanker was from Iran.
Something that President Trump should also consider is how the 1962 Crisis involved mutual Force. Either side could do as much fatal Damage to the other so it was mutually beneficial to resolve it. Neither demanded what could be seen as an unconditional Surrender by the other. Quite the opposite as Kennedy even told the Media not to say; "the Soviets backed down!"
Iran is effectively being asked to do just that, and given what happened in Libya after Gaddafi did the same you can understand their Reticence.
Not helped by it being done by an attempted force of Arms.
President Trump Trump.shouod remember that there's a difference between a Treaty - which is based on mutual Consent and a Fait Accompli - which isn't.
The JCPOA was a positive Treaty.
It meant cooperation between Iran and the UN Security Council. Something that could lead to other mutual Projects.
The fact that it involved the Security Council gave it multilateral Legitimacy, unlike whatever emerges from this unilateral 'diplomacy'.
It also meant Countries could trade with Iran again. They lost Billions in Trade when Trump#1 cancelled the Treaty and they couldn't, so it wasn't just a military based Agreement.
Whatever Agreement - if any - comes from these Meetings it won't yield that benefit. Kaja Kallas in all her innate Wisdom burned that Bridge when she announced the EU proscribing of the IRGC.
In one fell Swoop - from Lisbon to Bratislava, Tallinn to Athens - Ms Kallas has effectively neutralised one very big Incentive for Iran to sign anything.
As for the 'concern' about the treatment of Protestors.....
The Protests started in December last year because of Iran's declining Economy. This happened because of Sanctions against Iran that were reintroduced when the JCPOA was cancelled.
So the Protests and the Government Backlash are a Symptom of a Cause that wouldn't have happened if the JCPOA was still active.
The Protests started in December last year because of economic hardship caused by the Sanctions that recontinued after Trump abandoned the JCPOA.
ReplyDeleteBillions of Currency Units of Business were wiped out when the Sanctions prohibited Iran from trading with anyone in the developed World. This had a devastating effect on an Economy that had already suffered years of Sanctions before the JCPOA.
The Trump Administration must know this, like other American Governments knew it would do the same thing with Syria.. If not they shouldn't be in Government.
This is why all this 'Concern' for the Protestors looks a bit disingenuous. Even more so if the threatened War on Iran goes ahead and kills more of them than any Security Forces have.
The whole Crisis looks more and more like it has been manufactured by the Americans, starting with Trump#1 and is a replay of other Policies in the Region.
It also looks like an Attempt to appropriate a Deal that was sponsored by the UN and had the legitimacy of International Law - putting Trumps stamp on it with undue influence from Israel.
And why won't the Media tell us this when it's obvious to anyone?
ReplyDeleteAlso, what would the Law enforcement agencies of any modern liberal Democracy do if Protestors started using Firearms? Some of those Scenes in Iran are more like Firefights between Combatants than Protests.
Meanwhile, the Iranians are prepared to engage in Talks but they will only be kept to the Nuclear Enrichment Issue.
They will not discuss either their Missile Program of their Support for other Groups in the Region.
Given that Stephen Witkoff was obliged to visit Benjamin Netanyahu before he 'negotiates' with Iran it's obvious that he and who he represents want to remove what little Support the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank have left.
And how about the rest of the Region?
Washington must know how disruptive any War with Iran will be and what that could mean for the World's Fuel Supply which has already taken a battering by events in Eastern Europe.
In 1973 the Arab States withheld Oil Supplies to Countries supporting Israel which caused huge Queues at Petrol Stations and a lot of disruption.
As America seems to have begun acquiring the vast Oil Reserves of Venezuela is this a Contingency against that happening again? That or how Oil Supplies might be so disrupted in the Gulf by the War they are manufacturing with Iran the Arab Petrodollar Economy collapses and the US can sell Venezuelan Oil at a Premium?
Since their manufactured and deliberately protracted War in Ukraine this is what happened in Europe as it lost its cheap, reliable Russian Fuel.
And while Kaja Kallas shows the diplomatic Skills of an Imbecile in an EU so bereft of Political Luminaries like Schroeder and Chirac it isn't as if the Continent is in a financial Position to beat the Drum for more War.
Indeed, it has to be asked just how much more can the System take - battered by Pandemics and Conflict - before it goes into free fall?
Oh, and if all of this wasn't bad enough the last Nuclear Weapons Treaty left expired at Midnight last night.
Amid claims that Iran was cheating on their commitments to the JCPOA - which is why President Trump claimed he abandoned it - here's a Statement from a Representative of the IAE refuting the Myth that they were .......
ReplyDeletehttps://www.us-iran.org/resources/2018/8/4/myth-vs-fact-jcpoa
I've maintained that the JCPOA was a good, solid Treaty - not just because it guaranteed Iranian Compliance but also because of its 5+1 Arrangement. It had multilateral Legitimacy with the UN Security Council giving it scope for further enhancement with the international Community.
And because it lifted Sanctions it contributed to economic Stability.
The Treaty or Arrangement they will get with the Talks in Oman today are nothing like as solid and will be unilateral - involving Iran and the US+ Israel. Given what happened last year this might not be the most reliable Arrangement.
And will Stephen Witkoff offer Tehran an off ramp from the Sanctions that were reinstated after Trump abandoned the original Treaty?
The JCPOA attached no conditions about Iran's support of Allies in the Region or it's ability to defend itself.
ReplyDeleteBoth have proved effective to at least keep Israel in check as the latter has brutalised Gaza for over 2 years, captured and occupied more of the Golan Heights since the Assad Regime collapsed in December 2024 and bombed Lebanon.
The Iranians are sceptical at suggestions they should give up the means to hit back at Israel like they did last year which proved very effective. The Israelis were shocked at how extensive the Iranian retaliation was and it probably helped curb some of their activities and contributed to their Ceasefire in Gaza. Not perfect but at least giving the Palestinians and Aid Agencies some breathing space.
The Americans should realise that Iran is crucial to the balance of power in the Region .
Also, because of the disruption any War in the Persian Gulf would cause to Fuel supplies and economics Chinese input would have been useful. They had this, being one of the permanent Members of the UN Security Council. They get 50% of their Oil from the Gulf, so they and others involved with the JCPOA had an interest in it's success.
Probably the most we can hope for with the current Negotiations is that the immediate Threat of War is lifted, but Mr Witkoff has to realise hat Iran will not allow itself to be made prostrate.
I do feel that the international Community should be doing more to put pressure on the Americans to withdraw - which at least ratchets down the Tension by a few Notches.
While America uses it's concern for Protestors as the Pretext for their current Actions how many times has the National Guard been deployed during Protests in America (Kent State, Detroit etc) Civil Rights and Anti Vietnam War Campaigners would know about all that.
And how about more recently?
https://www.naacpldf.org/case-issue/challenging-state-violence-authoritarianism/
This is also the same America that has supported the same Israel that has killed Journalists covering the Conflict in Gaza, and who have bombed Schools and Hospitals while targeting Aid Workers trying to feed and treat Palestinians.
And while the same America that supported the worst Excesses of the genocidal Regime in Israel is critical of Tehran's treatment of People protesting at a Problem of Americas making it's the same President who, a year ago, told Zelenskiy "You are gambling with World war 3!"
ReplyDeleteLike his Policy towards Iran isn't!
And just when things couldn't get any more fractious, he has now signed an Order sanctioning Shipping companies registered in China and Turkey for transporting Iranian Oil. His Attitude at the moment seems to be about stopping any trade with Iran.
All this will do is diminish further any Claims America might have to the moral high Ground beyond the Iranian Borders.
He claims it's in defence of the Protestors but didn't Sanctions on Saddam's Iraq show him anything? They don't work and all they do, as the Protests show, is inflict hardship on the People. A People who would otherwise be getting on with their Lives had Sanctions not been applied if the JCPOA was still functioning.
And none of this is conducive to negotiating anything.
It'd be like a Battlefield where one side has offered a Flag of Truce to begin negotiating while their Cannons fire even more Shells than they did before.
Quite a few years ago now, when DOD Secretary Hillary Clinton was chomping on the Bit for a War with Iran I said the first People to suffer would be the Reformists she claims to speak for. We saw some of this after "Axis of Evil" caused a conservative Backlash.
Unless she could guarantee instant collapse of the Regime the Reformists would probably be arrested as potential 5th Columnists.
And what happened when America and Israel did attack Iran and People from other Groups in the Region?
They might have killed several high ranking Figures from Iran, Yemen, Hamas and Hezbollah but all it did was galvanise the People against them.
An estimated 1.4 Million People mourned at the Funeral of Hezbollah Leader Hassan Nasrallah. Huge by anyone's standards, vast given the total Lebanese Population.
It's one thing to support Protestors from a distance, another if those Protestors start seeing American Bombs and Missiles destroy their Homes, Businesses and Families. How many distraught Iraqis did we see during "Operation Iraqi Freedom" - showing the Cameras the Ruins of their Houses or Photographs of dead Relatives?
Something that no one seems to be mentioning is how President Trump plans to defeat Iran with one Supercarrier Group?
ReplyDeleteIran is huge, about the size of western Europe, with a Population of 80+ Million.
The "Coalition of the Willing" in 2003 had 4 US Carrier Groups, Forrestal Class Cruisers and support Ships, Submarines, the Royal Navy, the Australian Navy and all sorts of other Stuff including huge Air Force Assets and People have concluded that even that wasn't enough to defeat Iraq and stabilize the Country. Iraq descended into nearly 15 years of Looting, Civil War, Sectarianism, and Protest after Saddam was defeated, and Iraq is much smaller and far less populated than Iran.
So how does President Trump hope to defeat the Iranian Government and stabilise the Country with 1 Carrier Group and nothing like the myriad Aircraft, and 100's of 1000's of Troops that were used in both coalition Wars with Iraq?
Subsequently, not only is the current deployment provocative, creating the current and dangerous Crisis, it's also inadequate.
Iran also has 1740 Miles of Coastline, which is on both the Caspian Sea in the North and the Persian and Oman Gulfs in the South, while Iraq had very little to speak of at all, which would make it very difficult to secure the whole Country.
And has he even considered what this would mean for the Islamic Countries of Central Asia?
Iran has developed strong working relationships with these who are eager for Access to the Sea so they can export Goods to the rest of the World. Substantial Rail and Port Networks have been established while Iran itself imports agricultural Produce from them.
They form a Partnership based on shared Centuries old historical and cultural ties while acting to guarantee regional stability against fractious Problems like Afghanistan.
With whom Iran has a 572 Mile Border.
Who would secure that if Iran descended into Chaos?
Has the War already started?
ReplyDeleteMilitarily it could be argued that the War has been in Armistice mode since the end of last years 12 Day War. That Hostilities merely stopped temporarily pending each side regroup - particularly Israel who had sustained considerable Damage.
But on an economic and diplomatic level things have escalated dramatically.
India seized Iranian so called "Shadow Vessels" last Week, just days before the Meeting in Oman. This was to demonstrate Compliance with American demands that Sanctions against Iran be applied and any Country not doing so will be punished with 25% Tariffs. The Crews are still being held - along with the Ships.
Iran retaliated the following day by seizing 2 Ships and detaining their Crews.
This causes increasing diplomatic Pressure as more and more Assets and People are detained and Conflict has already started without a Shot being fired.
This is why Sanctions - while being no deterrent against an implacable Country like Iran - shouldn't be underestimated as a potential Risk to World Peace. That they put pressure on Countries currently not involved in the Hostilities while concurrently adding yet more Problems that have to be resolved at any Summit Meetings.
The Jupiter Missile Solution?
In 1962 America offered to withdraw it's obsolete Jupiter Missiles from Turkey and Italy if Khrushchev abandoned his Plans for Missiles in Cuba. This would also mean the lifting of the Quarantine Kennedy had applied to Cuba since the Crisis started. The Jupiter Missiles were why the Soviets deployed theirs in the first place.
This allowed both sides to back down.
The Partial Test Ban Treaty was signed the following year.
The Iranians have offered to dilute their enriched Uranium if America removed all Sanctions against them. While being an implacable Foe Iran doesn't want a War that could cause severe devastation and even WW3. No one does, like no one did in 1962.
Rather like the Jupiter Missiles Iran's Nuclear Program was the Catalyst that caused the current Dispute that started with Trump abandoning the JCPOA.
If Trump accepts the Offer the current Tension eases and there is scope for future negotiations like there was in 1962 and 3.
This removes the Risk of an escalation not caused by kinetic Warfare but by economic and diplomatic Realities that can happen beyond the influence of any Conference Room. It also helps prevent further Damage to an already strained global Economy.
Once this immediate Threat is removed there is Scope for a more permanent Resolution.
But not until.
Trump and everyone else has to accept that Iran as a regional Power is a fact if life that goes back 1000's of years. The Iranians know this whether they were ruled by Darius llnd or Ayatollah Khamenei and this has been acknowledged by World leaders for a very long time.
They are crucial to the balance of Power in the Region.
Because more recent American Presidents and Benjamin Netanyahu don't acknowledge it we face this very dangerous Crisis.
So, like Kennedy in 1962 with the withdrawal of the Jupiter Missiles Iran is offering a Concession to dilute their Stocks of Uranium if America lifts the Sanctions - thus, giving Trump an offramp from the current Crisis.
ReplyDeleteKennedy wasn't prepared to abandon all his Nuclear Weapons like Iran won't their Missiles or support for Proxies in the region, but their offer is a start in the right direction.
From that other things can happen.
The Sanctions as we have seen last week threaten to cause an Economic World War that will lead to actual Conflict.
What makes a lot of this even more dangerous is how Chinese and Russian Ships are bound for the Region for their annual Naval exercises with Iran.
They've done this every year for the last 8 years but this is the first time they've done so with the Americans in situ.
Not just in situ either, as they are there in an attempt to force Iran's Hand in Negotiations that look like more of an attempt at a Fait Accompli than a "Deal".
The worrying thing is; what happens when those Russian and Chinese Warships arrive at the Gulf of Oman to do their training exercise with the Iranians and they find the Abraham Lincoln Carrier group there with another on the way and something like 120 Military Transport Aircraft bring in all sorts of Weapons and Equipment?
Bad enough at the best of times but given the current Climate an extreme cause for concern.
Meanwhile, it looks like some of us were right when we said America had deliberately manufactured the Crisis with economic Warfare.
In a stunning Admission American Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant said they created a Dollar Shortage in December last year to cause such severe hardship Shopkeepers shuttered their Premises and took to the Streets.
This coincided with an Iranian Bank going under and the Rial went into free fall.
Things escalated from there.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/economy/2026/2/13/us-says-it-caused-dollar-shortage-to-trigger-iran-protests-what-that-means
And in what looks like a complete inability to understand the Process of Cause and Effect President Trump says how a "Regime change would be the best" citing Deaths and Injuries caused by the Regime since 1979.
Whoever's figures you believe with those killed during the aforementioned Protests every one of them would still be alive if America hadn't deliberately sabotaged the Iranian economy.
One of the biggest Ironies in all of this as far as Israel and Netanyahu is concerned is how it was the first Ruler of all Persia - Cyrus the Great - who repatriated Jews who had been dispersed and enslaved by the Babylonians.
Before this Judea was part of what the Babylonians called Yehud.
In what has been called The Edict of Cyrus which Cyrus proclaimed in 539BCE Jews returned to the Province, reinstated their national Identity and began rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem.
So the Judea Jewish People knew before the Diaspora of AD70 owed it's very existence to the King of Persia and while modern Iran might be what it is on the surface modern Iranians are very aware of how they are one of the oldest continuous Civilisations in the World and one of its most powerful.
Given the spectacular Failures of several recent foreign Policy Gambits in recent years I'm astonished that America would pursue it's current course of action with Iran.
ReplyDeleteIt seems the Capitol Hill Echo Chamber is incapable of acknowledging even the slightest Error in its Calculations and what this means for the rest of the World.
For example...
They probably convince themselves and the President that Iran would be like Iraq and Syria without considering the economic Ramifications and Threats to regional Stability.
Iran is far more significant to global Economics than either, while it's strategic Position in the Region is far more substantial.
No one has mentioned what this would mean for Turkmenistan for example, whose Relations with Iran have been described as "brotherly". The main Areas of these are Energy and Gas, Transit arrangements, giving the Turkmens access to the sea, and regional stability - particularly regarding Afghanistan.
Everything, from Water disputes involving the Helmand River to the millions of Afghan Refugees affect Iran's relationship with Kabul. Their Relationship is described as complex and pragmatic with both striving to stop Tensions from escalating.
If the very unlikely happens and a pro-West Government seized Power in Tehran whatever stability existing with Afghanistan would evaporate.
One country watching all of this very nervously is Pakistan.
Balancing relations with Tehran with those of Saudi Arabia and America a War with Iran could put too much pressure on them to decide who to support. They have pressed for a negotiated end to the Crisis obviously aware of their position in the World and internal Pressures. Pakistan is prone to political assassinations and coups.
I would call the current Stance in America irresponsible to say the least with scant or no regard for the millions of Lives it with devastate in the region. Anyone remember the shameful Press Conference Donald Rumsfeldt gave when Iraq was being looted out of existence and the Streets descended into Chaos and Violence?
And how about closer to home and what all of this has meant for everything from Fuel and Energy costs to the Cost of Living Crisis?
In their Billionaire Echo Chamber they are immune from all of this as they own the production and distribution process. They actually make more Money from Consumers having to pay more for everything.
So not only is the whole thing very dangerous to world Peace it's also a complete Scam.
All this extra Money we've been paying for our Food, Fuel, Energy and everything else since these forever Wars started - particularly in the last 4 years - is going somewhere isn't it!
ReplyDeleteAnd while all this goes on in February 2026 the Demonstrations going on in some Cities in the West now ought to have been happening in the years running up to December last year demanding America and others remove the Sanctions on Iran, end punitive Tariffs on anyone who traded with them, and the things that Caused the current Crisis.
ReplyDeleteAnd if they wanted to prevent a far bigger Slaughter - which is what will happen if America "intervenes" - they ought to have bombarded Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant with Letters, Emails and Texts demanding explanations about why America deliberately manufactured the Crisis.
If or when America opens fire on Iran there are no 'smart Weapons' that can tell the difference between a Reformist and a Conservative.
I also wonder if somewhere behind the Weekends Protests is an Iranian equivalent of Ahmed Chalabi - the Iraqi who lobbied America to go to War in Iraq in 2003.
Just how much. "Shock and Awe" do People think will be needed to depose the Iranian Government?
The resulting Deaths in Iraq, either directly or indirectly attributed to the Coalition forces caused by everything from actual Violence to Infrastructural collapse ranges from 100,000 (Iraqi Body Count) to nearly 700,000 (the Lancet). Most Cities lost Electricity and Water Supply and disposal and the Country ceased to function.
Iran is 4 times the size and nearly 4 times as populated while it's Military and Hierarchy isn't anywhere as centralised as those of Iraq.
Also, what happens to the Afghani Refuges whose numbers vary depending on who you believe. There are at at least 700,000 registered Refugees in Iran while many have fled or gone underground.
Who will look after them if the Government in Tehran falls?
Given how many were needed to occupy Iraq - which many have called inadequate - how many would be needed to pacify and stabilize Iran?
So, the Protestors in Canada and elsewhere during the Weekend would have been better advised to have begun protesting a long time before the current Crisis at its Causes and not the Effects - namely the Sanctions that have crippled the Iranian economy and then the deliberate manipulation of it by the American Treasury.
ReplyDeleteAnd who might the main Candidate for any new Regime be?
Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi - the Son of the Shah who was ousted in 1979.
Except, while there might be a large Iranian Diaspora after the Islamic Revolution, there were many who were either forced or fled from the Country while his Father was in charge. These weren't necessarily like Ruhallah Khomenei who was exiled in Paris before becoming the Ayatollah. Leftists, Liberals, Journalists, supported of Mossadegh, even other Iranian Aristocrats who opposed his autocratic Rule formed part of that Diaspora.
There were many others not as fortunate who died or endured years of Torture and imprisonment at the Hands of the SAVAK.
Revolutions like the one that happened in 1979 don't happen for nothing and there has to be a very solid reason why People would risk everything for it like they did.
Pahlavi isn't quite as popular as his Internet persona suggests either as allegations of deep fake AI and phoney Social Media Accounts inflating his Profile have been made, so there's an artificiality to his popularity that could prove dangerous to those thinking he could rule effectively.
And then what happens as former Government and Security People are like the Ba'athists in Iraq and begin an Insurgency? Could the Americans deploy enough Troops to prevent it given how big Iran is?
Don't get me wrong here either. I'm not particularly defending the Regime or it's practices, but how they have been dealt with in recent years contravenes international Law - of which the JCPOA was part - and undermines western Claims to any moral high Ground, while deliberately manufacturing a Crisis you can contrive to respond to is like knifing someone and blaming them for bleeding.
I'm someone who remembers rather more optimistic times when Iran began its long Journey to Reform 35 years ago, and then consolidated it 25 years ago, only to have it all undone, not by any indigenous reactionary Forces but by a Speech made by a US President looking to score a few Popularist Points after 9/11.
What might Iran be like now had that not happened?
The simmering Conflict we are seeing now threatens a massive loss of Life and conflict that could quickly spread to other parts of the World.
It's one thing to wave a Placard in Canada and demand America intervenes while you are 1000's of Miles away.from any Conflict, another completely when your Family, Friends, Home, Business, Job etc has been destroyed by American Bombs and Missiles.
ReplyDeleteHow many distraught Iraqis showed us the Ruins of their Houses and Photos of dead Children and Relatives after 2003? They might not have liked Saddam very much, but they liked that a lot less.
So, to reiterate the Context of this Post .......
ReplyDeleteIn response to the Question; Did "Axis of Evil" cause a conservative Backlash in Iran" here is what Google AI replied with .....
"Yes, George W. Bush’s foreign policy, most notably his 2002 "Axis of Evil" speech, is widely credited with fueling a conservative backlash in Iran that crippled the domestic reformist movement.
Key impacts of the Bush administration's approach include:
Empowerment of Hardliners: Bush's rhetoric provided Iranian radical Islamists with a powerful political weapon to use against their modernist rivals. By framing the U.S. as a persistent existential threat, conservatives revived militant revolutionary language and sidelined reformists like President Mohammad Khatami.
Stalling Reform: The "Axis of Evil" label was viewed by Iranian political elites as a "betrayal" of the cooperation Iran had provided during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. This shift eroded the ability of reformists to argue for transparency or moderation in foreign and domestic policies.
The "Axis of Evil" Impact: The speech sparked immediate outrage across Iran's political spectrum, uniting both reformists and conservatives in condemnation. Analysts note that while public support for reform remained high, the conservative "Old Guard" successfully used the perceived American hostility to seize the political initiative.
Long-term Shift: This backlash contributed to the eventual rise of hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005, marking a significant departure from the more cooperative era sought by reformists earlier in the decade."
We can put Scott Bessant's Admission in the same Category as Angela Merkel's confession that Minsk was nothing more than a Geopolitical Filibuster. What might other Politicians of recent years admit to I wonder?
ReplyDeleteIn the category of things obviously not passed on from Father to Son anyone remember a Series called "The Cold War"? It was brought to us by the Team that made "The World at War" and in the final Episode George Bush Senior tells us that he was not prepared to go and dance in the Berlin Wall in 1989 and gesticulate to Gorbachev because he realised how the Soviet Leader would have to respond.
Going back even further Kennedy told the Media not to say Khrushchev backed down in 1962 because how would he have to respond if they did?
Shame this wasn't passed down the Republican Party of more recent years as they (and the Democrats) have quite deliberately stirred up and provoked the other side.
They knew what the Regime in Iran would do because they wouldn't have caused the Crisis in the first place if they didn't. Like NATO and various western Leaders deliberately extended the Organisation to the Russian Border and supported a Regime that discriminated against Russians knowing how the Kremlin would have to respond.
Bessant and Merkel's admissions show that they fully understood the process of Cause and Effect.
There's a huge difference between being amoral and immorality.
They'd be the kind of Parents who'd tell their Children that it won't matter if they jump into the Lion Enclosure at the Zoo, put their Hand in a Fire or play Chicken with the Cars on the Motorway.
They know what would happen but what the hell huh?
None of this is helped by a large swathe of the Media who ought to know better. The thing is, they're probably like those Leaders and do.
If they don't they shouldn't be in Journalism.
Either there's a Communication problem with the Iran-US Negotiations or something wrong with the Reportage.
ReplyDeleteIran has offered to dilute their Uranium stocks back from the apparent 60% they are currently at, which reduces them from anything that could be deemed Weapons grade.
Donald Trump keeps on about them not having any Nuclear Weapons - which is what the dilution would do.
J, D Vance goes on about President Trump's "Red Lines" as they apply to Nuclear Weapons.
Thr Iranian offer would mean they would never be reached.
So why do the President and Vice President keep banging on about Nuclear Weapons when Iran has offered to render their Uranium Stocks unusable for Nuclear Weapons?
Are they deliberately ignoring the Iranian Offer because they have decided to go to War on Iran irrespective of what Tehran does?
I've mentioned before how the Iranian Offer is like the Jupiter Missile Solution.
That they are offering to render their Stocks of Uranium beyond military use is rather like Kennedy offering to withdraw Jupiter Missiles from Turkey and Italy.
The idea being that Khrushchev would end his military build up in Cuba.
So Iran's Offer - which would be scrutinised by the IAEA - should prompt Trump to end his in the Gulf Region.
Then, having prevented WW3, further Negotiations can continue leading to something akin to JCPOA2. It was after the Jupiter Withdrawal and Khrushchev's ending of the Cuban Missile Program that led to the first Nuclear Weapons Treaty in 1963.
While all this goes on and we are hurtling towards an existential Nuclear War where are the Protests about all that?
I disagree with Robert McNamara saying how they "lucked out" in 1962. Lucking out would have meant Weapons malfunction or something happening somewhere that would. stop the Crisis.
Resolving the Crisis was not happenstance.
It was a combination of Restraint by Kennedy (despite others at X-Com who wanted to bomb and invade Cuba) and the better Judgment of a Political Officer on a Soviet Submarine that prevented Catastrophe. If the Americans had bombed or invaded there were a tactical Soviet Weapons in Situ that the Whitehouse knew nothing about. It was because they decided not to invade those Weapons weren't used, not because of some Fluke of Luck.
If things had been different there would have been no Martin Luther King on Civil Rights, Germaine Greer on Feminism or the Woodstock Nation on the War in Vietnam. There would have been no Prague Spring either as History would have ended in 1962.
Like there would be no Reforms in Iran for the same Reason in 2026. Not only would there be no Iranians, there would be no anyone else either.
When the real Abraham Lincoln fought to abolish Slavery the most powerful Weapon around in the 1860's was the Mine used to destroy the Confederate Fort at Petersburg.
That just blew a big hole in the Ground.
If the USS Abraham Lincoln launches it's War on Iran the subsequent Blast will blow a Hole in and end everything.
In the continuing and increasingly tense atmosphere of the Crisis is a hefty dollop of Surrealness.
ReplyDeleteIn a complete failure to acknowledge any fault whatsoever in either his on or previous Presidencies Donald Trump has announced that "Iran cannot continue to threaten Stability" in the Middle East.
Beggars belief I know when you see the absolute Chaos that has wracked Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon and a Gaza which before American support of Israel's demolition was a comparatively peaceful Palestinian Enclave.
He seems utterly clueless about the instability his threatened War on Iran will do to the Region.
Blame Deflection in extremis and even more so given the American Intrigue behind the Tragedy in Ukraine.
And has he even considered the chronic Refugee Crisis his War on Iran would cause?
ReplyDeleteLeaders in the Region have all expressed concern at the prospect of millions of Iranians fleeing the Conflict flooding their Countries.
And while that includes Turkish Leader Recep Erdogan how about some of the less viable Countries? Is President Trump entertaining the Idea that 100's of 1000's of Iranians throw themselves at the mercy of the Taliban in Afghanistan (another of Americas foreign Policy disasters). Would Iraq (more if the same) be able to accommodate them as they flood into theirs?
And there was a Reason why millions of Afghanis fled to Iran
While southern Europe saw 1000's of Libyans risk everything to cross the Mediterranean in flimsy Boats how about any Iranians doing the same across the Persian Gulf?
Can the strained political Situation in Europe which has seen the rise of Nationalism endure yet another Refugee Crisis?
Does any of this sound like the stability President Trump claims to want in his recent Comments?
At least our Ministry of Defence has decided not to participate in this Folly.
ReplyDeleteThey've announced that they won't be giving President Trump permission to use any of their Airbases should he want them to launch his Airstrikes on Iran.
https://www.twz.com/news-features/u-k-denying-u-s-use-of-key-bases-would-impact-bombers-role-in-iran-air-campaign
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj98egkl7l1o
Both Fairford and Diego Garcia are crucial to any American Activity in the Gulf Region, which the Ministry are probably very aware of and maybe this tells Trump that his current course of Action is unwise - without actually saying it.
The Prime Minister has raised concerns about the legality of the American Policy with Iran.
It avoids a repeat of what happened in 1986 when American F111's took off from Bases in Britain to launch bombing raids on Libya without asking for Permission from our Government to do so. The raids apparently killed Gadaffis Daughter.
It was this that deepened the Hostage Crisis in Lebanon when John McCarthy was kidnapped as he left the Country on the advice of the UK Government.
What makes the American stance so dangerous as Relations with other World Actors deteriorated us how those Actors respond.
Reports are emerging that Russian Bombers have flown closer to Alaska in recent weeks than they ever have - probably testing the vulnerability and showing Washington what a multi front War could look like. As some of the American Assets now in the Gulf were pulled from Duties in the South China Sea might the Chinese do the same thing with Taiwan and the Philippines?
How about North Korea with South Korea and Japan?
ReplyDeleteSo, while Britain won't allow it's Bases to be used by American Planes to attack Iran on grounds of international Law, Arab States and others in the Gulf Region are closing their Airspace to them because of what this planned War will do to the Area and Russian Bombers spook Alaska it's like the international Community is showing President Trump where his current course of Action is leading.
And in all their Ham Fistedness how can the Americans expect Iran to agree to any sort of "Deal" as Tehran remembers what happened last year during previous negotiations?
As American military Assets pile up in the Region the Iranians must suspect that it wouldn't matter what they do or agree to they will be attacked. Would Kennedy or Khrushchev and Britain have signed the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty if Soviet Missiles were still in Cuba or American Jupiter Missiles in Turkey?
How could each trust the other if they were?
In better days European Leaders would have urged Caution and offered to broker a Peace not fallen into Line against the Iranians like Kaja Kallas did recently.
And how much of this is compromising any Talks on Ukraine?
What makes it even more dangerous is how any Training Exercises by either side could be interpreted.
Operation Able Archer in 1983 was meant to be a routine theoretical NATO Training Exercise were it not for how Relations with the Soviet Union were at an all time Nadir. Things were fractious enough without Soviet Intel picking up on a lot of unusual Activity in the NATO Camp. They were convinced that a NATO Nuclear Strike was imminent and were it not for a humble Russian Lieutenant rightly identifying Solar Glare for what it was the World could have been destroyed by Nuclear War in 1983.
As Russian, Chinese and Iranian Navies do their annual Training Exercises in the Gulf of Oman while American Warships flood the Region the Risk Threshold for something similar is raised to critical.
As Radar Screens on both sides fill with more and more confusing Blips and Diplomacy continually fails how ling would it be before something is wrongly interpreted? Add the interception if so called "Shadow Vessels" and things become even more volatile.
I'll admit Iran has Human Rights Issues - but how were these going to improve if any Reforms being made 25 years ago were undone by a Popularist Speech by an American President eager to capitalise on 9/11?
ReplyDeleteThere's also a complete lack of pragmatism in the western camp.
While Iran might not be in Amnesty Internationals list of favoured Countries neither was the Soviet Union in 1962/3. Stalin might have been dead 10 years but the Gulags were still in operation, People still disappeared, the Lubyanka still the most feared Building in Moscow, the Berlin Wall still being upgraded.
But none of this stopped Kennedy from negotiating positively with Khrushchev.
Also, as Russian Planes fly closer to Alaska and the Sino-Russian Navies cooperate with the Iranians in the Gulf while supplying Tehran with the latest in Military Tech here's what Google AI said about how "Axis of Evil" brought Iran and North Korea closer together.
ReplyDelete"Yes, the 2002 "axis of evil" designation by the U.S. generally pushed Iran and North Korea to strengthen their ties as a mutual defense mechanism, building on military cooperation that started in the 1980s. Labeling them together caused them to align against shared Western pressure, increasing cooperation in military technology, defense, and efforts to circumvent international sanctions.
Key aspects of this increased, closer relationship include:
Military Cooperation: North Korea has supplied Iran with ballistic missile technology, including Scud-B and Scud-C missiles, which Iran adapted and developed into their own systems (Shahab-1 and Shahab-2).
Shared "Anti-Imperialist" Front: The designation solidified an "anti-hegemony" stance, with both nations collaborating to challenge Western-dominated global order.
Strengthened Ties Through Isolation: As Ministerio de Defensa points out, persistent international efforts to isolate both countries fueled, rather than diminished, their partnership.
Strategic Advantages: The shared label led to increased coordination of economic and military efforts, with both countries leveraging their combined resistance to the US to advance their own security interests.
This alliance is part of a broader, modern "axis of upheaval" or "CRINK" (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea), as described by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace."
So GWB's 2002 Speech can be regarded as a big Geopolitical Gaffe.
He ought to have built on the cooperation Iran supplied in combatting Al Qaeda and Taliban Forces in Afghanistan and the Reformist Government of Mohammed Khatami which might have loosened Tehran's Ties with North Korea and reduced any perceived Threat from the Middle East.
One Venue for Conflict should War ensue is Iraq where Iranian backed Militias are poised to retaliate on American Bases. This would have been impossible 25 years ago in an Iraq who had opposed Iran for Decades.
It should also be remembered that when Saddam had his SCUD Missiles in1990/1 the Kremlin supported the Coalition that was ranged against him. That doesn't apply with Iran in 2026.
Iran's relationship with North Korea is built on mutual Support in the face of a shared Enemy, not on any similar Ideology or cultural and historical Ties. In a twist of Irony given the Rhetoric they got support from Israel during their War with Iraq in the 1980's. This was because the Israelis saw Saddam as a far bigger existential Threat than Iran.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, as I write the Iranians are continuing with their Nuclear Program.
They have repaired, reinforced and, where necessary, relocated the Facilities that were damaged in last year's Attacks.
This is because there is no trust in the current Negotiations.
They realise they are talking to the same People who abandoned the Treaty they had in 2015, a multilateral Agreement which was very favourable to their Aspirations. The same People who - in an act of the worst diplomatic faith - attacked them during previous Negotiations. And the same People who are massing the biggest Military Force in the region since the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.
In another comparison to the backdrop that formed the landscape for "Able Archer" in 1983 when Ronald Reagan coined the Expression "the evil Empire" about the Soviet Union Moscow saw it as an existential Threat and America could be poised to attack them at any moment. This, as any of us who remember, was how things got so bad we were the closest we had been to Nuclear War than we had since 1962.
So with the Activity happening in the Gulf Region, the War in Ukraine and the growing Tension over Taiwan any similar Rhetoric from America is anything but helpful. Why wouldn't Iran see it as much of a Threat the Soviets did 43 years ago?
What prevented War from happening was a Soviet Officer holding back and scrutinising correctly solar Glare on the lens of a Satellite Camera. With Iranian, Russian and Chinese Warships in the same Region as the Americans, so many Military Aircraft, and then any potential "Shadow Vessels" that would be intercepted who knows what those Blips on an increasingly crowded and confusing Radar Screen are?
And is the President aware of just how much this Policy compromises the very Democracy he supposedly wants for the Iranians?
ReplyDeleteThis was the Candidate who in 2024 told us that he wasn't just going to end the Wars that were happening then (and it's been a very long "24 Hours" in Ukraine) he was also not going to start any more. It's the same Candidate who is now mobilising the biggest Military build up in the Gulf Region since GWB launched his 2003 invasion of Iraq. So much for not starting any more Wars then and many who voted for him will remember this.
This was also the reason many did in 2016 when Hillary Clinton seemed to want a War with Iran. Some of her liberal Friends in Hollywood like Activist Actress Susan Sarandon even thought she would have had one with both Iran and Russia had she become President. It has also been reported that all her Policies towards Syria had more to do with Tehran than Damascus.
So why did Trump abandon the JCPOA when he became President?
Perhaps he thought that the reintroduced sanctions would do the same in Iran that they did in Syria.
One of the main reasons HTS swept Assad from power so quickly in 2024 was because the Army hadn't been funded or paid for Months and morale was non existent after years of fighting. This was due to the Sanctions which had crippled the Syrian Economy.
Iran is much bigger, wealthier, more populated and more coherent than Syria which emerged from Sykes Picot at the end of WW1. Some have argued that Syria was an artificial Construct because of this. Iran certainly isn't and traces it's Sovereignty back as far as the first Emperor of all Persia, Cyrus.
It also took nearly 14 brutal and bloody Years before Assad's Government finally collapsed. How long did President Trump think the same would take in Iran given that he has made no secret that a "Regime change" would be best for it?
Is he actually aware of this and has used the Nuclear Issue as an excuse to launch his War to accelerate the Process? Some of the answer to that Question might be found in how Israel is imposing irreconcilable Caveats to the Negotiations, things the Iranians won't do like end their Missile Program and support for Proxies in the Region.
So Americans who voted for Trump because he claimed to be the non-War President must be wondering if it's worth voting for anyone next time around.
That's if there is a next time!!!!
Can a Drone be confused for an Airliner on a Radar Screen?
ReplyDeleteYes is can, particularly at night and even without Radar with it's Green and Red warning Lights.
So on those very crowded Screens full of 'friendlies' and 'hostiles how would a Radar operator know if one of those Blips is a Drone ........ or Flight 655 ....... even flight 007?
The latter was a South Korean Airliner shot down by a manned Aircraft of the Soviet Air force in 1983, but 43 years later reliance on piloted Planes has reduced in favour of unmanned Air Vehicles (UAV's) which won't make any visual Identification of a Target before it hits.
The former an Iranian Plane shot down by an American Warship in 1988.
How would a civilian Ships Captain know that that Blip coming towards him is just a routine Check to see if he is part of a "shadow Fleet", a hostile about to sink him or even an unmanned Sea Drone? But then, how would whatever approaches him know what he is either?
The potential for mistakes like these that could seriously escalate the situation becomes exponential as more Ships and Planes equals more Confusion equals more Stress equals more Risk.
And it isn't just Shipping that will be disrupted by any Conflict in the Gulf and it's Region.
ReplyDeleteEven without (or to avoid) any mistaken Shootdowns a huge Area of Airspace would become off limits to civilian Aircraft. You can add this to the vast Area of Russian Airspace now inaccessible to certain Airlines because of Conflict and Sanctions. Even before Sanctions there was the tragic incident of Malaysian Flight 17 shot down over eastern Ukraine in July 2014 . Who did it remains unclear but the fact is it happened and the Conflict in Ukraine has nothing to do with Malaysia.
Diplomat, Politician and Journalist Rory Stewart tells us how his Mother hitch hiked across to India in the 1970's as part of the Hippy Trail. As that would include Syria, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan I'm not sure anyone could even do that now.
All this with how Shipping now needs negotiated "Corridors" to navigate the Black Sea and the ability to navigate anywhere on Land, Sea and Air becomes increasingly restricted, dangerous ........ and expensive.
And why are the Iranians enriching Uranium at all?
ReplyDeleteBecause President Trump forgot that Treaties are a 2 way Process, sometimes even more.
That when he abandoned the JCPOA not only was he no longer bound by it, neither were the Iranians.
This is why Iran went from the regularly verified 3.67% the Treaty required to the estimated 60% they are reported to be producing now. Experts tell us that this puts them only weeks from producing the 90% needs to make Nuclear Weapons.
All of this because the President abandoned the Treaty that reassuringly kept that figure 86.33% lower, continually checked by the IAEA for compliance.
And, did the President also realise that not only are Treaties a 2 way Process their existence means both parties have something to gain from it?
That if the Treaty no longer exists those Gains disappear, so Iran begins feeling like they have very little to lose if they increase their Uranium enrichment program? The Treaty ensured Peace (albeit sometimes an uneasy one) and economic advantages so why did President Trump abandon it in 2018?
Does it suggest that he always intended to go to War with them, so why not Iran begin to look like they could produce Nuclear Weapons as the same Deterrent other Countries have used against a potential Aggressor?
I've explained elsewhere here why I don't think Nuclear Weapons guarantee Peace but like Khrushchev in 1962 Iran might feel that they have to have a Deterrent against the growing Hostility against them, which is how the Soviets felt about Nuclear Weapons in Turkey and Italy.
Hence why Khrushchev deployed SS4 Missiles in Cuba.
The shroud of Ambiguity the lack of a JCPOA causes means the Iranians could look like they are going to enrich Uranium to weapons grade. Certainty is replaced by "are they - aren't they?" when the JCPOA ensured they weren't. Because it included the UN Security Council with it's 5+1 arrangement it had a robust Legitimacy.
Suddenly we could have yet another Nuclear power on the Worlds stage.
You should also remember that Trump abandoned the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty in his first Term too. An entire Class of Nuclear Weapons that the Treaty ended could now return in an Environment even more hostile than the Cold War because of an actual shooting War going on in Europe. The War in Ukraine is not like those of the Balkans in the 1990's or even that of Georgia in 2008 because of its potential global nature and the geo-economic Seismic Jolt it has inflicted on the World.
This is why the Atomic Scientists have regularly set the Doomsday Clock in recent years to the closest it has ever been to Midnight. The latest is now at 85 Seconds. That is less time than 1962 and 1983!
The Situation now is so parlous that the Era of Treaties is starting to look like another Age.
And as Reports are emerging of Missiles striking Tehran in what looks like an Israeli attack on Iran isn't it reassuring to know that our Media have their priorities right!
ReplyDeleteIn the most appalling Clickbait Sky News tell us in their Link on Google that Israel have attacked Iran - so given the seriousness of the Situation many People will click on it only to end up with a Video Commercial about a Food shop. Not only that but in what is supposed to be a "live" Streaming we end up seeing People in the studio talking about a Rangers and Celtic Football Game.
Firstly; how is it "live" when we have to watch a 30 Second Commercial?
Secondly; How is a Glaswegian Football Derby relevant to what could be the start of World War 3?
Not exactly Peter Arnett at the Baghdad Hilton in 1990 is it.
"Peace in our time"?
In what resembles a repeat of History the Omani Foreign Minister starts looking like Neville Chamberlain after he came back from Munich in 1938. The British Prime Minister had returned from Negotiations he and his French counterpart had brokered with Hitler over the Sudeten.
The Omani Foreign Minister had just announced that the indirect Talks he had held with Iran and America had made significant Progress and had achieved a Breakthrough with Iran conceding their Nuclear Program in the hope of preventing further and escalating Hostilities.
Munich facilitated the German appropriation of the Sudeten to prevent further Expansion by Hitler who told us he had no further Ambitions to do so.
Within a Year history told us something very different.
If Israel has attacked Iran they've done something similar and treated the Omani Statement like Hitler did Chamberlains "Peace in our time".
Hitler had no intention of keeping to his Agreement at Munich like Israel have none about the current Negotiations. It was what happened next that caused World War 2.
But then it has been reported that Israel have constantly provoked Tump during the recent Talks anyway.
I have to ask a People who base their very existence on the Old Testament and use it to justify their Presence in the Region why they have decided to launch their Attack on Iran during the Sabbath and how this contravenes the 4th Commandment in the Book of Exodus?
ReplyDeletePresumably Jeffrey Sachs and some of the other commentators we regularly see on YouTube?
ReplyDeleteSome of us have been writing about these Policies for more than 20 years and I wonder how many others in the Bloggersphere do so and seem to be ignored by the usual Suspects?
While Reports are emerging that Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has been killed along with 40 other prominent Figures in the Government President Masoud Pezeshkian is still alive.
ReplyDeleteWhile Propagandists might see this as a Coup that could bring a swift end to the Regime it should be remembered that Khamenei and his Circle were a known quantity who were willing to negotiate. Whoever replaces them won't be and might not be so amenable. They'll also be galvanised by why they became the new Leaders in Iran.
It's like those who were pushing for the Assassination/Death of Vladimir Putin without realising that he is (or at least was) one of the more western friendly Politicians in Russia. If he was killed he would be replaced by others who aren't.
The bombing of an Iranian School which killed many Children in it won't make the Iranians any more pliable either as it will unify all of them against the West and America and Israel particularly.
Khamenei even anticipated has Death and gave loyalists instructions as to what to do should that happen. One them - Ali Larijani the most prominent - has vowed Revenge on those responsible.
On his X Account he is quoted as saying; "We will make the Zionist criminals and the shameless Americans regret their actions. The brave soldiers and the great nation of Iran will deliver an unforgettable lesson to the hellish international oppressors,"
So any gleeful Speculation that decapitating the Regime will bring about it's immediately downfall are somewhat premature.
What makes the situation even more difficult is how Iran has closed the Straits of Hormuz. This will have huge Ramifications on the World's Economy already creaking under the Strain of other Wars and the recent Pandemic.
Weird speak and Oxymorons .....
ReplyDeleteA couple of Comments made by Figures in British and EU Politics merit some Criticism.
Maybe the British Foreign Office would like to tell us what "Shelter in Place and register your Presence" means. It just seems a bit stilted.
The other was from EU Foreign Policy Chief Kaja Kallas who you might remember did the most unfortunately ill timed proscribing of the IRGC during the very precarious Negotiations of a few weeks ago.
Imagine if Kennedy or Khrushchev had said the same of the KGB or CIA in 1962!
Her most recent Comment on the Death of Ali Khamenei was; "What comes next is uncertain. But there is now an open path to a different Iran, one that its people may have greater freedom to shape.
“I’m in contact with partners, including those in the region that bear the brunt of Iran’s military actions, to find practical steps for de-escalation.”
How, when they've just killed the Man they were negotiating with? He has been replaced by People who haven't and have expressed no intention of backing down.
And how does she see the killing as any way towards de-escalation? Any talk of "Regime Change" which her Statement was just a rephrasing of the same thing will invoke a Response to what will be seen as an existential Threat.
It was Talk about "Regime change" that caused the Negotiations to stall and showed the Government in Tehran that the Nuclear Program debate was just a Veneer.
ReplyDeleteBesides which, if the Iranians had agreed to anything how would that still apply if there was a new Government?
This is a similar Ruse to what was done to the Soviet Union when the West claimed Comments about NATO expansion no longer applied to what became the Russian Federation.
This Loophole was finally noted and other Treaties like the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty were adjusted and updated to include former Soviet Republics.
They would have to do the same with Iran if the Government did collapse, but with whom?
Meanwhile, some of the World's biggest Shipping Companies including Hapag Lloyd, Maersk, Nippon Yusen, and CMA CGM have suspended all Sailings to the Persian Gulf until further Notice. While Iran hasn't formerly announced their closure of the Straits of Hormuz there are nearly 300 Ships stranded on either side of it.
So, Ms Kallas, how is anything hinting at "Regime Change" going to lead to any sort of "de-escalation"?
ReplyDeleteWhen it happened in Iraq Conflict in that Country did anything but de-escalate.
It was the same in Ukraine.
This is what someone should ask at any Press Conference she gives.
It's rather like the one no one asked in 2001-3 when GWB was formulating his Foreign Policy.
"So, you are convinced Saddam has WMD's and he must be rid of them? Not only that but you also tell us that he has Links with, or is harbouring, Al Qaeda? So what might happen if you do indeed cause his Regime to collapse and these Al Qaeda obtain the WMD's you tell us are in Iraq?"
It was Iran who fought the Al Qaeda who were in Afghanistan at that time and even those who did appear in Iraq after Saddam was deposed.
The Coalition found itself barely adequate to the Task in a Country a quarter of the Size of Iran with the same proportion of Population.
What progress it made in Afghanistan was completely undone in 2022.
No Oil Corridor .......
ReplyDeleteWhile the Straits of Hormuz are closed and big Shipping Companies suspend sailings into the Gulf there's a big difference between this and the transport of Food and Grain in the Black Sea.
Because of the War in Ukraine World Food security was threatened as Ships transporting it could be attacked by either Combatants in the Conflict. This caused Turkish President Recep Erdogan to broker a Deal between Putin and Zelenskiy to guarantee that any Ships carrying Food and Grain should do so safely. This became known as the Grain Corridor.
The Problem with the current Crisis in Iran and the War being waged in the Region is who do you get to guarantee anything? You can't obtain any assurance from Tehran because Ali Khamenei has just been killed. Because Iran has effectively rendered the Strait unnavigable there's obviously nothing President Trump can do about it while the Gulf States lack anything like the necessary influence to do so.
So who would you get to negotiate for an Oil Corridor like the various Parties did the Grain Equivalent in the Black sea?
The current Situation can stand a few days but if it goes on for much longer the Price of Oil could go up from about $75 to $100 a Barrel.
This will have a serious effect on the global Economy.
And that would be if Iran did retain stable Leadership. What if it didn't?
The World couldn't afford the Consequences if Iran did descend into Civil War.
Some Media are trying to play down the potential economic Ramifications of the Weekends activities, which is another way of justifying the War. "Everything's fine, there's nothing to worry about" etc.
ReplyDeleteCNN tells us that the Price of Brent Crude only went up by 1 Dollar in the last 48 Hours, but this is only the start of the first day of Trading since the War began. Experts in the Industry have said that that situation can only last a few days before the increase becomes rather more steep.
Japan relies completely on Oil Imports and when their biggest Shipping Company suspends all Trade with the Gulf that shouldn't be taken lightly. Maersk is the worlds second largest Shipping Company and they have done the same.
President Trump has said that this Conflict could go on for 4 Weeks.
How much damage will that do to the Economy?
The thing is, everyone in his Billionaire Echo Chamber will be immune from any of the Inflation this would cause as the increase in Fuel Costs finds it's way into the Energy Markets and Shopping Malls.
When was the last time any of them went to the Supermarket?
Update.......
As I said, the CNN Report was premature and only 7 Hours later Reports are coming in that Gas Prices have spiked by something near 30%. Qatar has just announced the suspending of Activity at its Rass Laffan Gas Terminal - the biggest LNG Facility in the World. Saudi Arabia has made a similar Announcement about their Ras Tanura Oil Refinery after it sustained damage.
These 2 things will impact the worlds Oil and Gas Industry and cause a trauma in its Economy.
Meanwhile, Kier Starmer has opted to allow British RAF bases be used by the Americans. Endorsing the use of both RAF Fairford and the Facilities at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean it can only draw the UK deeper into the Conflict. President Trump has described Starmer's initial reluctance as "disappointing".
Meanwhile, all is not quite going Trumps way on Capitol Hill.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has called Trumps War on Iran "illegal".
Citing the US Constitution he says how Article One clearly states that only Congress has the right to declare War and it is not the right of the President. So, the Conflict in American constitutional terms is even worse than unilateral because even Washington's own Politicians had no say about it.
It does set a dangerous Precedent in how it means the President could start ruling by Decree rather than inclusivity and consultation.
In a Quote that could find traction amongst American Voters who feel let down by the supposedly "Peace President" he said .....
ReplyDelete"Americans want the government “to focus on making their life better, making their life more affordable, not getting involved in another endless war in the Middle East that is going to end in failure,” he continued.
“This administration somehow found the resources, has found billions of dollars for bombs, but can’t find any money to actually bring down the high cost of living here in the United States of America,”
I find myself agreeing with him and as it looks like Britain is gradually being drawn into the Conflict I wonder if any of our Politician would share the same Sentiment.
American Secretary of State for Defence Pete Hegseth tells us that Iran were the ones who backed out of a Deal that was very nearly finalised during the Negotiations ........
ReplyDeleteGiven the seriousness of the Consequences which we are seeing now, and how it seems to get worse by the Hour, maybe someone should ask the Omani Delegation for Verification.
Remembering what happened to some of the negotiating Team who were at the Istanbul Meetings between Russia and Ukraine in 2022 (gaoled, died, discredited and accused of being Russian apologists) Mr Hegseth's Comment needs to be corroborated before it is believed.
On the Subject of people backing out of Treaties there are quite a few Websites where you can download a full copy of both the JCPOA and the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty.
Set against that backdrop the Defence Secretaries Comment looks like a bad case of Pots and Kettles.
Iran had a deal, a very solid one, recognised and ratified by a multilateral Group of Parties which was scuppered by President Trump acting very unilaterally.
How much worse has it got since I last posted here?
The Saudis have just announced that they might have to get involved with the War because of the Damage to their Refinery.
That and the Iranian Attack on US Bases in their Territory.
Would these be the Talks Mr Hegseth was referring to?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/28/peace-within-reach-as-iran-agrees-no-nuclear-material-stockpile-oman-fm
Hardly seems like something Iran would back out of.
And as the Saudis are considering becoming involved in the War it shows just how quickly these things can escalate in just a few Hours.
Need it be said that if they do become involved it will be rather more significant than the usual bombing of West Beirut or an Invasion of South Lebanon that has been all too familiar in the last 44 years?
If there is a Conspiracy to destroy the Arab Economy then it's obviously working.
ReplyDeleteAs Qatar and Saudi Arabia suspend Production at 2 of the biggest Facilities in the World, not just the Region, and others like Kuwait and Iraq might have to do the same in the next few days, and while distribution has also halted because Shipping Companies won't operate there it's gradually shutting it all down.
The Damage that will ensue as each Country is drawn into a Conflict which is spreading as I write and you read this will accelerate the process.
It was Oil that made the Economies of the Arab and Persian People in the years after WW1 so if you destroy that Economy they become what they were before it. They can no longer afford to defend themselves like they have and end up like Syria did in 2024 after HTS defeated Assad's demoralised and depleted Army and Israel destroyed all its Equipment.
Before WW1 most of the Arab World was part of the Ottoman Empire.
Who might the new imperial Occupiers be?
Don't the IDF have a Patch on their Uniform that shows the Area that would be occupied?
Is it any Coincidence that the so called 'Protests' in Iran that started in December last year were concurrent with the American Operation in Venezuela, which removed Maduro from power?
Seizing Venezuelan Oil is now within Americas Grasp and while the US might be relatively self sufficient in Oil this would give them a huge Surplus to sell to the rest of the world.
We already have a Precedent as Europe is now dependent on them for a lot of its it's Fuel at a premium because the Ukraine War (contrived by America) ended it's much cheaper supply from Russia.
Given what that has done to the European, Scandinavian and even even our Economies and what this War is doing to the Arab ones what was it Henry Kissinger said?
"To be an Enemy of America is dangerous, to be a Friend could be fatal!"
And what makes this feasible is how American Politics has been working in the last 10 years.
ReplyDeleteIn 2016 the Electoral Choices were More-War Hillary or "The Donald" who at least looked like he might be more conciliatory to to the Russians than his rival Candidate.
And I emphasise "looked like" because in his first Term he continued the expansion of the Ukrainian Military and abandoned the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty with the Russians.
He then continued with ending the JCPOA Treaty with Iran and was very antagonistic about the dropping of Sanctions. Sanctions that were lifted by the Treaty.
This began Syria 2 as their reintroduction gradually strangled the Iranian Economy and led to 'Protests'.
In the last US Election the Choice was even worse as you could vote for a senile Candidate who was obviously a Trojan Horse for his More-of-the-same-in-Ukraine Vice President or "The Donald" who told a War weary America he would end the Ukraine Conflict in 24 Hours.
He became President in January last year and those "24 Hours" have become more than a year.
Back in Iran the Stage was being set for the War he wanted with Tehran in his first Presidency and now he has it in his second.
It seems that American Politics home and away is a process of bribing, bullying and blackmailing. That and a lot of Smoke and Mirrors.
Trump even admitted recently that America would be feared!
It has become completely anathema to that envisioned by the Framers of the 1770's who wanted nothing to do with anything that even resembled Colonialism.
Another thing is certain which he was also very vociferous about, the War and it's Effects are making life very difficult for the BRICS Economy to continue.
As some American Politicians like Congressional Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries have decided to revisit the 1776 Constitution and a very serious War Crime against it is being done in the Persian Gulf it might be prudent to ask the Omani Delegation in the now non existent Talks Iran was having with America to see exactly what transpired.
American Defence Secretary Hegseth claimed Iran walked away from a potential "Deal" but did they?
The Talks were meant to continue on Monday to consolidate what the Omanis described as significant progress and substantial Iranian Concessions but President Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu's Hostilities in Saturday put an end to that.
Given what happened to some of the Delegates who were in Istanbul in March 2022 trying to end the War in Ukraine this should be done sooner rather than later.
This pisses me off and I hope the usual Suspects on YouTube are reading this because it's about you......
ReplyDeleteSince I began watching their Stuff about the Ukraine War I've commented on it and even written entire Posts about it.
That and other things relevant to it.
It seems through a weird combination of recalcitrance and obtuseness they have a Lump of Concrete called a Narrative that they have decided to maintain which is completely oblivious and ignores the Opinions that might even be similar to theirs.
There might be other Bloggers, Writers and online Journalists who have experienced the same thing and this is extremely negative.
It's like they've decided there's this cozy little Cartel of People who are allowed to have an Opinion about anything and woe betide anyone who dares to impinge on any of it.
It probably also goes some way to explain why - despite YouTube being concurrent to everything that has happened since 2003 - it hasn't stopped any of it.
Looking at some of them the years when things started going wrong don't seem to have done any damage to their Lives while a few of them have Resumes that are anything but conducive to the Opinions they claim to have.
Meanwhile, President Trump has said British Prime Minister Keir Starmer "is no Churchill" because of his Stance on America and Israel's War on Iran.
ReplyDeleteNo he isn't - but then Trump is no Roosevelt either. Americas WW2 President sought Congressional Approval to declare War on Japan, Germany and Italy as stipulated in Article 1 of the Constitution. Trump did nothing of the kind as he launched his War on Iran.
He made even less effort to seek a UN Mandate for it, but then, if he had, maybe some of the Delegates on the Security Council might have reminded him of his cancelling the JCPOA they had with Iran until 2018.
While Starmer might not be a Winston Churchill for reasons other than the current War on Iran might I also remind Readers that although Congressional Leaders like Hakeem Jeffries have raised Concerns about the legality of the War, and also how the needs of the American People have been subjugated by it, he was also opposed to any ceasefire in Gaza.
Where did he and other Legislators think all this was going, starting with the Vote for the forever Wars in Iraq and continuing with every vote passed to supply and support Israel Israel?
Congressman Jeffries might have been a bit more consistent if he had lobbied for it and an end to the brutal Genocide that had been happening there for more than 2 years.
And while Neville Chamberlain did not seek a Vote in the House of Commons to declare War on Germany after Hitlers invasion of Poland it was because he didn't have to.
The British Constitution of the time did not require it and any declaration of War could be decided by the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
So, while Trump and his inner Circle did the same thing he wouldn't have been a Chamberlain either because his Countries Constitution did require the approval of its Legislative Representatives to go to War.
If Chamberlain had to do the same he would have got the Vote because most of the House supported it.
What makes Trump even less like Roosevelt than Starmer might be less like Churchill is how even though there was no ambiguity at all about the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbour there was no evidence that Iran was going to attack America.
Despite this Roosevelt still went to Congress to obtain the Mandate to declare War on Japan.
Here are unrelated Sources telling you.......
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2026/3/3/trump-admin-offers-scant-evidence-on-iranian-threat-in-america-first-war
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-tells-congress-no-sign-that-iran-was-going-attack-us-first-sources-say-2026-03-02/
Is Iran a Regime?
ReplyDeleteYes it is, and one that has Human Rights Issues - but then, so was the Soviet Union, and so is China.
But then, the expression "Regime" can refer to any form of Government, democratic, authoritarian and totalitarian. It is not a pejorative Term implying anything. It merely describes a Structure of Government, Administration, Finance and Society.
There are those that are either authoritarian or totalitarian, but it's how you deal with them.
Imagine if western leaders after WW2 had been like General Patton during it. He wanted to continue fighting east, not against the Germans but against the Soviets. Both Roosevelt and General Eisenhower had to hold him back from that. What if Kennedy had succumbed to the Will of Curtis Le May and the other Chiefs of Staff at Excomm and invaded Cuba where the Soviets had over 100 tactical Nuclear Weapons ready to be fired at the Invaders?
What if every Cold War NATO Secretary General in West Germany decided to invade the GDR or provoke the Soviet Soldiers garrisoned there?
What if General Douglas MacArthur had had his way and the US nuked China during the Korean War and Truman hadn't 'retired' him to prevent the War from spreading?
A Regime is exactly what it is, be it democratic, authoritarian or totalitarian, but that doesn't mean you deliberately provoke or preempt Conflict with them.
You also have to ask why some authoritarian and totalitarian Regimes exist and endure as long as they have?
Why was there a Revolution in Russia if everything was fine there before 1917? Why did China have a Civil War that lasted Decades before the Communists won in 1949? Why did People risk everything in Iran in 1979 and depose the Shah?
The Soviet Union lasted 73 years before the Red Flag was lowered at the Kremlin for the last time. The PRC still exists after 79 years and Islamic Republic of Iran after 47.
While these might not be liberal Democracies they were and are Regimes that endured for that long because Millions of People support them.
Having mentioned the Constitution and the American House of Representatives isn't trying to pass a War Powers Act meant to block Trump's War in Iran rather like closing the Stable Door long after the Horse has bolted?
ReplyDeleteThe last few Days has seen the galvanising of Iranians and the further radicalisation of them. Khamenei whose Popularity was waning has now been martyred and replaced by an even more extreme Cleric.
The Gulf Region is turning into a Hellscape of burning Ships, Buildings, Airports, Resorts and Installations. 100's of 1000's of People are trapped there, Economies are going into Spasms and all the Dominos are falling into somewhere looking like World War.
Iran now has a leader of sorts that wouldn't be at all amenable to Negotiations while who would broker them anyway?
Things are happening and escalating so fast that googling "Iran latest" every hour yields yet more Search Results. Not even the thick of War in Ukraine saw so much News Activity.
Killing Khamenei was the equivalent of destroying Nord stream. A Bridge that is now well and truly burnt.
And how did no one in either Houses know in advance of what was coming? Surely someone must have done, and should have acted accordingly to their sense of Patriotism and Right and Wrong, asking the relevent Questions in the House and preemptively wrong footing an illegal Conflict before it happened.
Yet another Comment about the YouTube War Sceptics.....
ReplyDeleteIf you can't even read this why should any of us take your so called analysis seriously?
If you won't, how are you any different to to the recalcitrance and mental atrophy that had led us into this Crisis?
Oh, and don't call me Donald!
Good Morning Judge!
And you can have a Coffee in a Church without being an Islamophobe dropping Bombs on Iran can't you Pasquale!
ReplyDeleteIn an Act of supreme Arrogance President Trump has said he must have a Role in choosing any new Iranian Leader.
ReplyDeleteWhile many People would correctly remind him of what happened to the last Leader America chose for Iran others could argue that that was a long time ago.
But more recently, how about Leaders America has chosen for Countries in the Region?
How about Ashraf Ghani the Afghan Leader who was deposed by the Taliban in 2021? This was a Leader whose Governance had had a very hands on Policy by America, particularly during Trump's first Presidency, in a Country that had endured Decades of War. Deposed by a Militia everyone thought had been defeated in somewhere far smaller than Iran.
And what about Ahmed Chalabi in Iraq?
Many Iraqis didn't like Saddam very much but they refused to be ruled by what they saw as an American Puppet, failing to even qualify as an Iraqi MP in the 2005 Election. Then, in what must be a tragic Paradox, the once "George Washington of Iraq" was found by Jay Garner amongst others to have become an Iranian Agent.
A large part of the Country also began leaning towards Iran and away from the Western Forces - and this was the Iran of Ali Khamenei. This was despite the huge presence of Coalition Forces on the ground and in the Air at the time and the pledges of western Aid and investment.
But then, how much Money was ploughed into Afghanistan to support the Governments of Karzai and Ghani?
Trump also says that any Ground War would "be a waste of time"!
So how would he even attempt to support or 'appoint' an approved leader of Iran if he has no presence on the Ground? An Iran that has a huge Militia of Loyalists to the current regime in a Country the size of western Europe?
The Basij, originally set up as a Militia during the Iran-Iraq War has a staggering 25 Million Reservists and 600,000 ready for immediate duty. And these are Volunteers not Conscripts.
These would be the Forces any American backed Proxy would have to fight to gain Control of the day to day running of the Country. How many Kurds with any sense of realism would want to go against that? Previous attempts like this have failed miserably.
America had half a Million Soldiers in Vietnam when it began it's "Vietnamisation" Policy. This was when they transitioned Military Duty to the ARVN in the early 1970's. This was swept away by the Forces of Hanoi who took control of Saigon in 1975.
Not that dissimilar to what happened in Afghanistan in 2021.
Anyone will tell Trump that you can not defeat and control a Country from the Sea and Air and you have to use ground Forces to do so. Could he even hope to temporarily seize Tehran to appoint any new Leader let alone make that permanent - along with the rest of Iran?
How would he secure the Coastline along the Strait of Hormuz - the most strategically important area of Iran - to ensue safe passage for the Shipping currently unable to sail to or from the Gulf?
ReplyDeleteIt is only 21 Miles wide and fluctuates in width as you travel through it. Iran has Mortars that could cover half that width which would reach the Sea Lanes. They would be easily concealed when not in use and quickly deployed.
The only way you could hope to prevent this would be to occupy the Ground Area around it and have very regular, dense Patrols.
Unfortunately, the Kurds America and Israel are thought to be considering as a Force to invade Iran are in the wrong part of the country. Iranian Kurdistan is in the North West a few 100 Miles from the Hormuz Strait and they would have to fight their way through IRGC Soldiers, the regular Iranian Army and the huge numbers of Basij Militia who would be mobilised to get there.
Iranian Mortars with 120mm and 160mm Shells could inflict serious damage on Ships sailing through there and would be difficult to detect from Sea or Air Patrols.
So, even if Reports tell us their Missile and Drone Attacks are slacking off because Airstrikes are destroying the Launches and Iran is running low on them that is only the beginning of the Campaign.
There would have to be a Ground War to secure whatever Leader Trump thinks he could install.
Which, as we have seen in Afghanistan, even earlier in Vietnam and before in Iran might not last anyway.
So, who's "Pro War Bob"?
ReplyDeleteNot me, that's for sure!
And I'm not Israeli ..... Mr Haiphong!
ReplyDeleteAll of this is happening because Donald Trump is President!
ReplyDeleteBut how?
Via a Process of bullying, bribery and blackmail the rest of the World has to endure the Bulshit Circus Theater of American Politics.
"You're either with us, or with the Terrorists" GWB told it looking straight into the Camera. Like there's no such thing as Neutrality or the Non Aligned Movement never existed.
After 8 years of Dick and George it looked like there might be Light at the end of the Tunnel as the first Afro-American President was voted in.
But then, the Republican Ticket was hamstrung by it's Running Mate - the very right wing Sarah Palin.
It looked good for a while, but then there was Syria and Libya, the continuing Iraq Debacle, Victoria Nuland meddling in Ukraine and - in the Wings - self appointed Heir Apparent Hillary Clinton who spent a lot of her time as DOD Secretary poking Russia, China and Iran in the Eye.
Some even thought a War with either of these could happen in the first year of any Presidency she might have.
The Republican Mainstream looked like Dick and George 2 as J.E.B amongst others was in the running, but then forward came "The Donald".
He looked like something new and People hoped he would be more conciliatory to the Russians, helping to thaw the gradually freezing Climate with Moscow. Except he trashed probably one of the best things that came from the Obama Presidency - the JCPOA. He did the same with the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty and was more of the same with Ukraine.
Also, in an act of Political Irony he began doing what his biggest influence Ronald Reagan was firmly against - the Tariff Wars.
He lost the second election and Supporters stormed Capitol Hill, but what did he lose it to?
A Candidate who should never have got past the 25th Amendment.
Joe Biden seemed increasingly doddery as his Term continued and some of us weren't sure whether he was Paul Von Hindenburg or Emperor Franz Joseph.
As the War in Ukraine dragged on and got worse he was like the most frigid years of the 1950's Cold War era when no one would talk to the Russians. Britain and the EU seemed no different and some of us remembered Political Giants like Jacques Chirac and Gerhart Schroeder who weren't Americas Psychophants.
Terrified at potential Nuclear War we were relieved when along comes Donald who told us he would end the War in Ukraine in 24 Hours.
He sat there and told Zelenskiy he was "gambling with World War 3" and it looked like he wasn't going to be more of the same with Kiev.
But at least he was talking to the Russians, except that doesn't seem to have yielded any Results at all.
That was over a year ago and that War looks no nearer ending.
And in that year he has tried annexing Greenland, kidnapped the Venezuelan President, all but declared War on Canada and stifed the Worlds economy with Tariffs.
Then we get 2 Wars with Iran, both when there were supposed to be Negotiations.
Now who's gambling with World War 3?
But in the Theater of American Politics we start seeing Politicians posture in the House, after the second War has started, and amnesiacs forget how many of them voted to support Israel's Genocide in Gaza with Weapons and Money.
Some put forward the War Powers Act like they've just rediscovered Article One of the Constitution, like that huge military Build up before the War started wasn't a Heads up in advance.
And all this because, for 25 years we have had to choose between either/or in American Politics.
Maybe we don't want either/or and want something different instead.
More recent News ......
ReplyDeleteChina has announced they are stopping Exports of Fuel and Diesel - retaining it for their own use. This means even less Fuel for the rest of the World.
It's a bit like something from a Documentary called "When the Oil runs out" where Countries recall their Tankers and stop exporting to other Countries.
It is reported that some of the biggest Cities in the Gulf are running out of Food. One said Dubai has about 12 Days left - although that should be verified. This is because they can't import anything via the Sea and all the Gulf States rely heavily on Food from elsewhere. Saudi Arabia has offered to help by being a Landbridge to bring Supplies in via Road and Rail.
Things are becoming so acute some Europeans are beginning to inspect the Druzba Pipeline which has been attacked by Ukrainians. Before the Ukraine War it was one of the main Arteries of Fuel from Russia.
Oil Prices have reached $100 a Barrel in some Markets - and that is in the first Week of the Conflict. This will have a devastating Effect on People on fixed Incomes, Welfare, Pensions, limited Savings and minimum Wages. In the last Crises Prices went up by up to 45% for basic Items in Supermarkets. These never went back down again and could increase by another 40-50%.
The Man responsible for all this was made a Millionaire by his Father when he was 8 years old so I'm not sure he has ever been to any Supermarket.
He's also the same President who told us to inject Disinfectant to stave off COVID and advised the EPA that they should wash Coal to make it a clean Fuel.
That and the "big beautiful Bill" which cut deep into Health and Welfare provision and gave his Billionaire Friends a huge Tax Cut.
From MAGA to MIGA.....?????
ReplyDeleteAs the MAGA Operatives gradually feel betrayed by what they thought was the "America first" President how empty must the "Make Iran Great Again" posturing be?
Seeing what Trump has done to his own Base, the People who voted for and supported him, how can any Iranian with any sense fall for the MIGA Brand that is being bandied around at the moment?
The Food Crisis Reports are quite believable.
ReplyDeleteThe Gulf has been nominally inaccessible for a week and completely inaccessible since Wednesday 4th March - with all Shipping ceased and Gulf Ports closed.
That's 5 days when Food has not been able to reach a Population of about 23 Million People. That doesn't include that of Saudi Arabia which has Seaports on the other side of the Peninsular.
Having said that, any Saudi infrastructure will now have to be used to supply those People on top of the 36 Million of its own it already does. This is going to put a huge strain on a Region that produces very little Food of its own because it is predominantly Dessert.
Thankfully, the Saudis have invested huge in a very extensive and efficient Road and Rail Network which will help facilitate this.
Ironically, it should be easier for them to do this because they have direct Access to Fuel which they do produce unlike the many Countries who rely on Supplies imported from the Gulf. As the latter begin to tap into Reserves to keep Logistics working this will become more difficult.
It's this that will cause Food Inflation as they transport it to the Shops and will also compromise availability.
It'd be nice to be able to think that Donald Trump's Government factored all this into their Decision to go to War with Iran but they probably didn't.
Trump is completely delusional.
ReplyDeleteHe tells us that Iran is being "decimated" - except a CNN news crew reported back from there a couple of days ago showing Shops fully stocked and People going about their daily business like there was no War at all. Things looked very cohesive and Morale good.
He also says Iran could become very wealthy if they went along with his Plans, but his own Economy is in bad shape with minimal Job Creation and Growth since taking office. His War threatens to send it into free fall as Signals are showing a similar Preamble to the Slump of 2008.
He also forgets that China bought a lot of Americas Debt after the 2008 Meltdown amounting to about 1.1 Trillion $ in 2010, while Japan did something similar. Both Economies are suffering because of this War and his Trade War with Beijing.
And there's also the de-dollarisation Countries have been doing in recent years.
His Political Currency is being devalued too as MAGA Supporters feel betrayed at seeing their "America first" 'Peace President' get involved in yet another foreign War. You could almost think this War was being fought in 1984 not 2026 with so much Doublespeak going on.
He now finally admits that there might have to be a ground War involving Troops.
How many he intends on mobilising is a Question for him and the ominously renamed Secretary of State for War (Trumps Idea). Even after the so called "surges" Troops in Iraq and Afghanistan only amounted to about 125,000 each, and that included the "Coalition of the Willing". They only just managed to curb the Insurgencies and discovered that some Afghan Soldiers they had trained had very mixed Loyalties. We all know what happened in 2021 - partially due to his "Deal" with the Taliban.
Coalition forces in Iraq were supplemented by the Iraqi Army that had emerged after the fall of Saddam. While there might be a few who could be recruited in some Regions of Iran it would be nothing like the proportion who joined the post-Saddam Army in Iraq
At it's Peak America had 500,000 Soldiers in Vietnam (of which Donald Trump wasn't) and they couldn't control a thin slither of Land on the Indonchinese Coast so how does he propose to do so in Iran?
As I've said, Iran has a Militia - the Basij - that has 600,000 ready for immediate Mobilisation and another 25 Million Volunteers who could be deployed. This is alongside the IRGC and regular Army. Volunteers - not Conscripts.
And where exactly would he send his Army through?
Turkey has wanted very little to with the War even if he could send them via there, and if he did he would have to go through the Kurdish Regions. This would cause a huge Rift between him and Erdogan whose People have had decades of Problems with the PKK and their own Kurdish People.
The Kurds themselves might be reluctant remembering what as done to them - particularly in Syria - after they supported the West.
If he chose to go through Azerbaijan he would have to airlift all of it or go through the Caucasus. How might that end as Ramzan Khadyrov is one of Putin's loyalist Allies? What might it mean for any Conflict between the Azeris and Armenia, and given how Iran has brought the Gulf Oil Economy to a standstill how about that of Azerbaijan?
Not sure the Turkmen, Afghanis or Pakistan would be very accommodating.
He could try a Beach Landing, but that could be destroyed as it arrived by swarms of Drones and Hypersonic Missiles.
There's always Iraq ....
ReplyDeleteBut how might the Iraqi People respond to seeing yet another American Army arrive after they were glad to see the back of the previous one? What might it do to any Cohesion in Iraq as it causes a Rift of those who are for and those against? The comparatively few Americans that are there are a cause of Resentment among many Iraqis.
Also, if they did decide to invade Iran through Iraq they'd have to muster their Forces via Saudi Arabia or Jordan to get there.
The Iranians have brought the Gulf Oil Economy to a standstill with minimal Damage that could be repaired and back online very quickly. What happens to the Saudi Infrastructure if they see huge Armies massing in Saudi Arabia? They could inflict Damage in a huge scale. It was when the Houthis started targeting their Oil Facilities with a fraction of what Iran has that caused the Saudis to end their War with Yemen.
What might it mean for any alternative Food Routes to other Gulf States, set up because the Gulf Seaports are closed?
I've got to say this ......
ReplyDeleteHave some of the Usual Suspects on certain online Video Platforms been waging a Proxy War here? Things that are said that connect with here that seem too coincidental to be a Coincidence?
Some of them come across as very weaselly but imagine if they were negotiating with someone about something.
What if they were sat in the other side of a Table to Vladimir Putin for example.
Probably one of the shrewdest People who ever lived is scrutinising every aspect of them. What they say, every twitch, glance, flutter and pitch in the Voice, what they do with their Hands.
With all this Information they decide if you could be trusted, and they see you in real life, close up and full size.
How some of them come across on a small Mobile Phone Screen looks a bit dubious, while a few appear rather smug which really does get People's backs up.
How far might they get in any Negotiations?
What if you add Bulshit to the Mix?
That you've made Claims that can't be substantiated? Suffice to say they will know everything about you beforehand and know if you're laying it on a bit thick.
I'm starting to think they've been watching too many Australian Soap Opera's rather than trying to solve the most dangerous Geopolitical Crisis of our or anyone else's time!
ReplyDeleteIt has been announced that Oil Prices have come down in the last 24 Hours.
ReplyDeleteIt's thought this was due to Trump saying the War could be over soon.
The Price climbed to a staggering $119 a Barrel from the $70 it was before Hostilities - then dropped to $91.
This might sound great, but one thing Monetarists don't understand is that it isn't about how much something costs, it's about it's availability.
When they cut Spending in Social Provision they might save Money but it means less Provision.
A Supermarket might announce they are selling Boxes of Corn Flakes for 50p and they usually have 500 in stock. A Crisis has meant they only have 200 so that's 300 Families that will have to go without. You can't eat Cash or Numbers on an online Bank Statement.
A Power Station can't run on Money to provide Electricity for Factory Produce and an Economy can't for distribution.
The Crisis still means some Countries are down by up to 70% on Fuel to operate - however much or little it costs.
There's another Problem too.
While Food Stocks are running out in the Gulf States some of those Countries produce Fertiliser for Countries 1000's of Miles way. This is just as bottled up in the Gulf as Oil and LNG which will have a severe impact on global Agribusiness.
Trump might also announce that he will underwrite the Insurance for Ships that do sail except they won't have anything to transport while Qatar's main LNG Terminal and Saudi Arabia's Oil Refinery are offline. Besides which, even with an Escort you still have to find People willing to do so. A Crewman has to balance the Job with the Risk.
In the complex World of Supply Chains Money isn't everything.
It has also been asked if Trump is only doing this to deflect from all the Publicity about Jeffrey Epstein. That, as more and more Information about those involved with the jailed Sex Offender emerges the Iran War keeps it off the front Pages.
ReplyDeleteAnd are Netanyahu and Zelenskiy playing a similar Game?
What is keeping the Israeli Prime Minister out of Gaol for serious Fraud is being Prime Minister while Zelenskiy could face deep Scrutiny for Embezzlement on a huge scale were he not President of Ukraine.
So, if you have a War that could be dovetailed into another you can sell yourself as an indispensable Leader guiding the Country through a Crisis.
The potential Food Crisis is worse than anything Bob Geldof had to deal with in the 1980's.
ReplyDeleteBand Aid might have made many £Millions to buy emergency Food Aid for Sudan and Ethiopia but the Food had to exist in the first place. In 1984-5 Ukraine was producing the most Food in Europe and many Countries had their own Surpluses.
This Crisis could affect Areas far bigger and more diverse than a couple of Countries in North East Africa. Some of which sent Food to them.
And that is a World where the Population has nearly doubled in the 40 years since Live Aid.
Something People need to remember is that the Qataris and Saudis closed their LNG Terminal and Oil Refinery not because they were deliberately targeted by Iranian Projectiles but because of Damage from Fragments of intercepted Missiles and Drones.
ReplyDeleteThey considered it too dangerous to continue using the Facilities.
What would happen if Iran did fire Missiles at them or any others?
The Oil Refinery in Tel Aviv was very badly damaged when they did.
One of the sickest Ironies about the unprovoked attack on Iran which unravels the Rhetoric about Human Rights etc is how America and Israel express such concern for the Rights of Iranian women that they kill their Children with the deliberate bombing of the School on the first day of their War.
Don't they realise how their Attack makes them look to the rest of the World?
If I was an American or Israeli Ambassador in any of the Worlds Capitals I'd be wondering what I represent to the host Country.
And while we might ask if America and Israel realise how their illegal War makes them look to the rest of the World, it must also be asked what the last 23 years means for Diplomacy.
ReplyDeleteWhen GWB coined his "Axis of Evil" Gaffe and set in motion the process that led to where we are now, he also gave the World a Fait Accompli; "You're either with us or with the Terrorists". This put the international Community in a horrible position, like their sovereign Right to self determination had been subjugated to the Whim of Washington.
There were those who stood up to it like the French and German Leaders in Europe and they took a battering for it. Anyone remember those "Freedom Fries"? It was like no one was allowed to have the Opinion that, although they certainly do not support Al Qaeda etc, they might not necessarily support the American position either. There were some who saw through a lot of it too and what has transpired since is self evident to that.
We are seeing the same thing happen again as Spain refuses to go along with Trump's policy, and while Madrid now faces the Wrath of American Economic Warfare we also see how much Washington has done to pull other EU leaders into line since Jacques Chirac and Gerhart Schroeder as Frederick Merz looks like Trump's Vassal.
So what does this mean for diplomacy, if it has existed in any meaningful form in the last 20 years? Are the American and Israeli Embassies there to act as an interface with the host Nations - or just issue orders?
You can vote for anyone in a liberal Democracy .... as long as it's America and Israel
Tony Blair might have chided Kier Starmer for his Skepticism of Trump's Iran Policy, citing the "special relationship", but how would he look if we compared him to when Diplomacy did mean something?
While he just totally fell into line with GWB 25 years ago, in 1962 David Ormsby Gore was very influential with President Kennedy during the Missile Crisis. Indeed, it was the same with a lot of Kennedy's Foreign Policy - going as far back as when they were both University Students.
Could Tony Blair make any similar Claims? Britain looked very diminished to other parts of the World - particularly Latin America.
As a contrasting Parallel to where we are now JFK worked to enforce the Foreign Agents Registration Act on the American Zionist Council - the parent organisation of what would become AIPAC. He wanted Transparency on Israeli funding from the Jewish Agency in Israel and the extent of its lobbying in the US. Unfortunately very little progress was made and the Issue was dropped after he was killed in 1963.
Other Areas he was concerned about were Israel's regional Policies and he even advocated a Right to return for some Palestinians who had been displaced after 1948.
And then there was Israel's Nuclear Program.
He was continually pressuring the Israeli PM David Ben Gurion for Transparency regarding the clandestine Nuclear Reactor at Dimona and demanded its Inspection. How does that contrast with the JCPOA and Iran's compliance with the IAEA?
While we have seen unquestioning American (and allied) support for Israel's activities in Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon and the Golan Heights in recent years Kennedy joined the Soviet Union in condemning Israeli incursions into Syria in 1962.
Where might Tony Blair sit with all this?
Meanwhile, Oil Prices have fluctuated wildly in recent Days ranging from $70 to $119 a Barrel for Brent Crude. They are currently at about $90.
ReplyDeleteThis might last for a few days as Politicians have some Tools at their disposal to keep it like that. Everything from Subsidies to convincing the Markets that the War will soon be finished. Trump did the latter in the last couple of days, probably to reassure the Market that the situation will stabilise. His offer to insure Ships that are prepared to travel to the Gulf was designed to have the same effect.
This can only last a finite amount of time before the brutally unavoidable arithmetic of Availability begins to happen. No amount of Politics will keep the Petrol Stations stocked or fuel up Energy and Logistics Systems.
As this increases Prices we might see a similar Policy like we had here in Britain during the Pandemic with Government Payments towards our Electricity Bills and a gradual prioritising of Resources to cope with the Crisis.
President Trump has talked himself into a Quagmire as he must convince everyone his War will be won soon, and then has to intensify his Assault on Iran to achieve it. The problem there is how any semblance of restraint or observance of the Rules of Engagement are further eroded as he becomes increasingly desperate. Like there were any there to start with.
If he fails those Prices will go up and his Position at home and abroad looks increasingly parlous. His Gulf Allies become increasingly twitchy while his own Base becomes more and more restless.
Other Allies also feeling the Pinch begin to review their Support and ask if it was ever a good Idea.
All this is in the interim while any contingencies like Pipelines across the Arabian Peninsular to the Red Sea Coast and the Levant would take years to build along with the Terminals to distribute it. Oman could play it's part in this with extended Facilities on its Gulf of Oman Coast with both them and Saudi Arabia making a lot of Money in Transit Fees.
Then there's the Food Crisis.
While Oil has been fought over since it became the default Resource for the World's Economy the same could happen with Food. It has even been suggested it could happen with Water.
We have already seen the potential with this with India and Pakistan as the latter has Facilities upstream on the Indus River, while Syria has control of the upstream Tigris and Euphrates to Iraq. Iran has a tacit Agreement with the Taliban as the Helmand River irrigates the East of the Country from Afghanistan.
Then there's the potential Horror of those very vulnerable desalinisation Plants in the Gulf that supplies most of its Population.
So, there's no denying that Trumps War on Iran is an unmitigated disaster with Ramifications spreading the length and breadth of the World.
When he tells us it'll be over by Easter People were told in 1914 that WW1 would be over by Christmas.
Iran, the War of unintended Consequences!
ReplyDeleteYou only have to scroll through any one of the News Websites - from the Daily Telegraph to Al Jazeera - to see the utter Devastation Trumps War has unleashed on a World recovering from a Pandemic and still reeling from the Conflict in Ukraine.
A lot of People thought GWB's Iraq War was ham fisted and stupid but the unintended Consequences of this one makes those of that one pale into insignificance.
It's difficult to list the huge itinerary of negative effects it has had.
The obvious to anyone Attacks on Shipping, the Oil and Gas Shortage Vis a Vis the Energy Crisis and impact on global Logistics. The devastated Gulf Tourism Industry losing £600m a day, the potential Threat to world Food Security, manufactured Drought, the additional strain on Defence resources and even fears of Drone attacks in California.
The IEA (International Energy Agency) has decided to release Oil Reserves to stave off some of the Impact on the Supply and prevent huge Price Hikes, but that is finite and can't last indefinitely. And as the Description suggests these are the last Redoubt before things really do become dire.
Talk in Whitehall, London of Fuel and Energy Rationing are even being mooted while the Chancellor has to devise ways of helping the Public deal with the additional Costs.
And, now an American probe into the Iran Girls School Bombing is finding that it was probably an American Missiles that did it.
Elsewhere here during the 12 Day War in June last year I began writing a Post called "The War everyone hoped would never happen", and while no one hopes any War would happen the Consequences of this one are so bad it should never have happened at all.
It gets even more surreal ......
ReplyDeleteThe "Peace President" renamed the Secretary of State for Defence the Secretary of State for War and the current holder of the Office Pete Hegseth has pulled the Press Credentials of photographers because recent Pictures taken at a Press Conference were deemed unflattering.
There seems to be no limit to the Vanity in the Trump Administration who renamed the Kennedy Center to include the current Presidents Name - forgetting the Center was built to commemorate a President who was murdered in November 1963.
Maybe Mr Hegseth has seen the Film "MacArthur" and thinks he looks Ike Gregory Peck.
His Boss is beginning to look like George C Scott might if he played Mussolini.
And while President Trump said British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is no Churchill he is in danger of becoming him, not when he was the legendary Prime Minister during World War 2, but when he ordered the Dardanelles Campaign. The ill fated Mission was meant to clear the Strait of Turkish Soldiers and Guns so British Ships could sail into the Black Sea during the first world War.
Trumps equivalent could be his Attempt to clear the Strait of Hormuz. His planned Operation "Epic Escort" will finally bring American Warships and civilian Vessels in range of Iranian short range Missiles and Drones. For most of the Conflict they have sailed far enough away to avoid them. Because the Strait is only 22 Miles wide at it's narrowest Ships will have very little response time if a Missile is fired at them
The best way to reopen the strategic Shipping Lane would be to end the War, not feed it with yet more Lives.
Iran has 120mm Razm Mortars with a Range of 16 Kms and the even heavier 160mm Vafa Mortar that can fire an estimated 5-8 Shells a Minute to a range of 20 Kms.
ReplyDeleteBoth of these would very easily reach any Ship passing through Hormuz and America doesn't have any Interceptor capable of shooting down Artillery Shells.
Unlike Ballistic Missiles they are easily concealed after firing and leave no signature on any Satellite Systems when they are.
You also need to remember that they have the same Weapons and Rocket Launchers as Hezbollah who have fired these into northern Israel quite successfully.
Also, stealth Technology might work when Ships are obscured by the Horizon, but at the range created in the Strait of Hormuz it becomes meaningless as Targets become visible to line of sight firing.
So, if President Trump does commence with "Epic Escort" he will be putting his Warships within range of all of this and instead of the half a dozen or so American Military Casualties they've reported so far that could run into the 100's as each Ship is fired on.
120mm is just over 4 inches, while 160mm is over 6 and countless 1000's of Tonnes of Merchant Shipping were sunk by Guns of that size during both World Wars.
Meanwhile, some advice to what must be thousands of other Bloggers writing about all this and are as concerned about it as I am. Be very careful about posting your websites URL on those YouTube Comments Pages. I did and noticed a severe drop in Traffic not long after.
They might try and create the Impression that were all in this together but we aren't and I think they want to monopolise the Opinion-sphere on this and every other Subject.
And while we might ask if America and Israel realise how their illegal War makes them look to the rest of the World, it must also be asked what the last 23 years means for Diplomacy.
ReplyDeleteWhen GWB coined his "Axis of Evil" Gaffe and set in motion the process that led to where we are now, he also gave the World a Fait Accompli; "You're either with us or with the Terrorists". This put the international Community in a horrible position, like their sovereign Right to self determination had been subjugated to the Whim of Washington.
There were those who stood up to it like the French and German Leaders in Europe and they took a battering for it. Anyone remember those "Freedom Fries"? It was like no one was allowed to have the Opinion that, although they certainly do not support Al Qaeda etc, they might not necessarily support the American position either. There were some who saw through a lot of it too and what has transpired since is self evident to that.
We are seeing the same thing happen again as Spain refuses to go along with Trump's policy, and while Madrid now faces the Wrath of American Economic Warfare we also see how much Washington has done to pull other EU leaders into line since Jacques Chirac and Gerhart Schroeder as Frederick Merz looks like Trump's Vassal.
So what does this mean for diplomacy, if it has existed in any meaningful form in the last 20 years? Are the American and Israeli Embassies there to act as an interface with the host Nations - or just issue orders?
You can vote for anyone in a liberal Democracy .... as long as it's America and Israel
Tony Blair might have chided Kier Starmer for his Skepticism of Trump's Iran Policy, citing the "special relationship", but how would he look if we compared him to when Diplomacy did mean something?
While he just totally fell into line with GWB 25 years ago, in 1962 David Ormsby Gore was very influential with President Kennedy during the Missile Crisis. Indeed, it was the same with a lot of Kennedy's Foreign Policy - going as far back as when they were both University Students.
Could Tony Blair make any similar Claims? Britain looked very diminished to other parts of the World - particularly Latin America - during the Bush/Blair Era.
As a contrasting Parallel to where we are now JFK worked to enforce the Foreign Agents Registration Act on the American Zionist Council - the parent organisation of what would become AIPAC. He wanted Transparency on Israeli funding from the Jewish Agency in Israel and the extent of its lobbying in the US. Unfortunately very little progress was made and the Issue was dropped after he was killed in 1963.
Other Areas he was concerned about were Israel's regional Policies and he even advocated a Right to return for some Palestinians who had been displaced after 1948.
And then there was Israel's Nuclear Program.
He was continually pressuring the Israeli PM David Ben Gurion for Transparency regarding the clandestine Nuclear Reactor at Dimona and demanded its Inspection. How does that contrast with the JCPOA and Iran's compliance with the IAEA?
While we have seen unquestioning American (and allied) support for Israel's activities in Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon and the Golan Heights in recent years Kennedy joined the Soviet Union in condemning Israeli incursions into Syria in 1962.
Where might Tony Blair sit with all this?
And while we might ask if America and Israel realise how their illegal War makes them look to the rest of the World, it must also be asked what the last 23 years means for Diplomacy.
ReplyDeleteWhen GWB coined his "Axis of Evil" Gaffe and set in motion the process that led to where we are now, he also gave the World a Fait Accompli; "You're either with us or with the Terrorists". This put the international Community in a horrible position, like their sovereign Right to self determination had been subjugated to the Whim of Washington.
There were those who stood up to it like the French and German Leaders in Europe and they took a battering for it. Anyone remember those "Freedom Fries"? It was like no one was allowed to have the Opinion that, although they certainly do not support Al Qaeda etc, they might not necessarily support the American position either. There were some who saw through a lot of it too and what has transpired since is self evident to that.
We are seeing the same thing happen again as Spain refuses to go along with Trump's policy, and while Madrid now faces the Wrath of American Economic Warfare we also see how much Washington has done to pull other EU leaders into line since Jacques Chirac and Gerhart Schroeder made their Stance as Frederick Merz looks like Trump's Vassal.
So what does this mean for diplomacy, if it has existed in any meaningful form in the last 20 years? Are the American and Israeli Embassies there to act as an interface with the host Nations - or just issue orders?
You can vote for anyone in a liberal Democracy .... as long as it's America and Israel?
Tony Blair might have chided Kier Starmer for his Skepticism of Trump's Iran Policy, citing the "special relationship", but how would he look if we compared him to when Diplomacy did mean something?
While he just totally fell into line with GWB 25 years ago, in 1962 David Ormsby Gore was very influential with President Kennedy during the Missile Crisis. Indeed, it was the same with a lot of Kennedy's Foreign Policy - going as far back as when they were both University Students.
Could Tony Blair make any similar Claims? Britain looked very diminished to other parts of the World - particularly Latin America - at that time.
The Israeli influence.
As a contrasting Parallel to where we are now JFK worked to enforce the Foreign Agents Registration Act on the American Zionist Council - the parent organisation of what would become AIPAC. He wanted Transparency on Israeli funding from the Jewish Agency in Israel and the extent of its lobbying in the US. Unfortunately very little progress was made and the Issue was dropped after he was killed in 1963.
Other Areas he was concerned about were Israel's regional Policies and he even advocated a Right to return for some Palestinians who had been displaced after 1948.
And then there was Israel's Nuclear Program.
He was continually pressuring the Israeli PM David Ben Gurion for Transparency regarding the clandestine Nuclear Reactor at Dimona and demanded its Inspection. How does that contrast with the JCPOA and Iran's compliance with the IAEA?
While we have seen unquestioning American (and allied) support for Israel's activities in Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon and the Golan Heights in recent years Kennedy joined the Soviet Union in condemning Israeli incursions into Syria in 1962.
Where might Tony Blair sit with all this?
The Gulf/Kharg Island is not Ploesti......
ReplyDeleteUntil he launched "Operation Barbarossa" Hitler was always concerned that the Ploesti Oilfields in Romania were very close to the Soviet Union. Being his Ally the Romanians were his main Source of Oil during World War 2. There was the much smaller Field in Hungary - but most of it came from Ploesti.
He was also it's exclusive Recipient and it fueled his War Effort.
Present Trump has threatened to bomb Iran's Facilities on Kharg Island while Pete Hegseth is still trying to draught a Plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
The Gulf is not Ploesti in that it doesn't exclusively supply any Antagonist in the War. Neither is most of it on the opposing side to President Trump.
By waging his War and prompting Iran to seal off the Gulf the Conflict is not only damaging the Economies of his Allies there it is also doing the same with those elsewhere. The most affected are in some of the most sensitive Regions like South Korea, Japan and the Philippines.
And while the War could inflict severe Damage to the World's Economy Hegseth has to try and plan an Operation to reopen the Hormuz Strait without looking like Churchill and his ill fated Dardanelles Campaign. It was not Winston's finest Hour, costing him his Job at the Admiralty and nearly costing him the Prime Ministership in 1940.
What makes his Task even more difficult is how Iranian Missiles that could be fired at Ships passing through might be much further inland than the Turkish Guns of 1915. He also doesn't have an allied Force of nearly half a Million Troops to secure a Bridgehead.
Not only that but he would also forfeit his Babies biggest Asset - range and stealth. His Ships have withdrawn to safer Waters and some have Stealth Technology. Those would have to be deployed in situ while Stealth means nothing when you can actually see the Ships.
The Gulf/Kharg Island is not Ploesti......
ReplyDeleteUntil he launched "Operation Barbarossa" Hitler was always concerned that the Ploesti Oilfields in Romania were very close to the Soviet Union. Being his Ally the Romanians were his main Source of Oil during World War 2. There was the much smaller Field in Hungary - but most of it came from Ploesti.
He was also it's exclusive Recipient and it fueled his War Effort.
Present Trump has threatened to bomb Iran's Facilities on Kharg Island while Pete Hegseth is still trying to draught a Plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
The Gulf is not Ploesti in that it doesn't exclusively supply any Antagonist in the War. Neither is most of it on the opposing side to President Trump.
By waging his War and prompting Iran to seal off the Gulf the Conflict is not only damaging the Economies of his Allies there it is also doing the same with those elsewhere. The most affected are in some of the most sensitive Regions like South Korea, Japan and the Philippines.
And while the War could inflict severe Damage to the World's Economy Hegseth has to try and plan an Operation to reopen the Hormuz Strait without looking like Churchill and his ill fated Dardanelles Campaign. It was not Winston's finest Hour, costing him his Job at the Admiralty and nearly costing him the Prime Ministership in 1940.
What makes his Task even more difficult is how Iranian Missiles that could be fired at Ships passing through might be much further inland than the Turkish Guns of 1915. He also doesn't have an allied Force of nearly half a Million Troops to secure a Bridgehead.
Not only that but he would also forfeit his Navies biggest Asset - range and stealth. His Ships have withdrawn to safer Waters and some have Stealth Technology. Those would have to be deployed in situ while Stealth means nothing when you can actually see the Ships.
The Coalition of the miffed.
ReplyDeleteDuring the 1990/1 Gulf War Saddam fired dozens of Scud Missiles at Israel. This wasn't necessarily to damage Israel itself, but to goad the Israelis to join the Coalition ranged against Baghdad. He believed that as soon as this happens the Arab Countries who supported the Coalition begin to back away, the most significant would have been the Saudis whose Territory was used for the whole Operation. America and other World leaders urged the Israelis not to get involved because of this.
This was years before the Abraham Accords and some recent recognition of Israel by Arab States. In the year before the current War the Saudis looked set to ratify the Treaty. The Accords were a Trump#1 initiative and Skeptics could argue that the Treaty was an attempt to garner Arab support for a future War with Iran.
It was also not long after the Gulf War that American Bases began appearing in the Region, all of which have been attacked by Iranian Missiles and Drones.
They've also been aimed at Gulf State civilian Infrastructure. Dubai airport - the busiest in the world - was hit, forcing it to close, while the same has happened with others. Hotels have also been fired at because US Service Personnel were staying there.
Then there's the Oil and Gas infrastructure which is suffering damage and the effect on the Gulf States has been huge, from $600 Million a day in lost Tourism Revenue, a huge Exodus of People as Ex-pats from around the World return home or relocate, and the almost complete disappearance of Oil and Gas incomes.
Then there are Countries not at all impressed with the planned use of Kurds to fight any Ground War. Both Turkey and Iraq have protested against it for fear of it causing a Surge in Kurdish nationalism in their own Countries.
Then there's the discontent amongst some Arab Populations.
Iraqi Shia Muslims and those in Bahrain have launched huge Street Protests. Bahraini Government Forces had to forcibly quash the one happening in Manama. This is causing Arab Governments to become increasingly nervous and question their Involvement with the Americans.
There's a growing Arguement that, while America claims to protect them from Iran they wouldn't be fired at at all if the Americans weren't there.
Is Trump manufacturing a wider Crisis?
Because of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz President Trump has called for Ships to be sent from several Countries to reopen it.
Citing a list which includes the UK, China, Japan, South Korea and France is he using this to drag everyone else into the Conflict? He must by now becoming very aware of the unilateral nature of the War while Ships from other Countries could be a Trip Wire to involve the Countries they came from.
While they deliberate on this Trump has said he will "bomb the Hell" out of the Coast of Iran. Given that Iran has the same Rocket Launchers Hezbollah have used very successfully in their War with northern Israel just how far inland would he have to bomb?
America used twice as many Tonnes of Bombs on Vietnam than all allied Bombs dropped in WW2 - and still lost - despite 500,000 Troops on the Ground - so just how many Munitions would he have to use?
The Russian Angle ....
ReplyDeleteAs each Force fighting in the Gulf appeared Moscow gradually changed sides.
In 1990/1 without actually contributing Military Assets they supported the Coalition ranged against Saddam and voted for it at the UN Security Council (Resolution 678). In 2003 Vladimir Putin did not support GWB's "Coalition of the Willing" and it was that years War with Iraq that gradually began the deterioration of their Relations with the West.
In both Wars with Iran they are an Ally of Tehran.
China maintained a Policy of Neutrality during the 1990 Gulf War but vehemently opposed the 2003 Conflict. They have a similar Stance to the Russians with Iran, supplying Weapons and Intel to Tehran.
France sent 18,000 Troops to the Gulf in 1990 while Germany was constitutionally restrained from actual Military Support but sent Money and Weapons to the Coalition.
Both Countries were against the 2003 Conflict.
So there's a Pattern throughout all this showing how America becomes increasingly isolated in their Policy towards the Gulf Region which begins prompting Questions about it's Legitimacy. The current War violates both their own domestic and international Law.
In 35 years they seem to have made the transition from leaders of the free World to something less supportable.
After 2 Weeks of Catastrophe this feels like 100 years ago.......
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/28/peace-within-reach-as-iran-agrees-no-nuclear-material-stockpile-oman-fm
.......And it's hard to believe that we were at that position at all
In what must be one of the most astonishing examples of failing to understand the process of Cause and Effect President Trump has said he was "surprised" that Iran attacked the Gulf States..
ReplyDeleteThis might be understandable if the US Bases deployed there had remained passive or Iran had fired the first Shot. Indeed, if they had they could legitimately claim their Presence is to do exactly what they say, to protect the Gulf States from Aggression. The problem is, none of this applies and they were used from the very start to launch the War on Iran.
Anyone who remembers the Cold War will also remember why Countries that hosted American short and medium range Nuclear Missiles also had the biggest Protests to have them removed, particularly Germany. They did so because it made them a first strike Target in any Nuclear Exchange, or even a conventional attempt to destroy them.
It's the same with the Gulf States and the American Bases after it was apparent to the Iranians they were there to facilitate the attack on them.
Equally astonishing is how he has ignored the Opinions of many in the international Community who advised against this Conflict. Everyone from Constitutional Lawyers to Economists have elaborated as to the legal and economic Consequences of it. Even Strategists have expressed Concern at the Military and Geopolitical Ramifications.
Maybe rather than sending Ships to the Gulf to get ensnared in the Miasma the UK, China, Japan, France, South Korea and others should tell him that the best way to open the Straits of Hormuz isn't to feed it with more Fodder and escalate the War, it is to end Hostilities.
I really don't like being proved right by horrible things happening but it must be about 6 Months ago when I suggested People write, email or otherwise contact their legislative Representatives on local, regional, devolved, national and international levels where ever they might be expressing their Fears at the seemingly endless process of Conflict and where it could lead. It's only now that I began hearing it said by some People in established Social Media - 2 Weeks after the Iran War started.
ReplyDeleteIs Trump trying to manufacture a global Crisis? (Cont'd)
ReplyDeletePresident Trump is now trying to draw NATO into the Conflict by telling them they will face a "bad Future" if they don't help to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
They, or anyone else, aren't under any obligation to repair the catastrophic Damage of his making.
Besides which, has he forgotten why NATO was never used in Ukraine? That even with all the Russophobes in the Organisation they knew that their direct involvement would lead to a World War.
Turkey, NATO's biggest armed Member apart from the US, has said they are keeping firmly away from the Conflict however much they might be provoked, despite probably having the most geostrategic Reasons not to. The War directly affects them more than any of the others.
NATO is under even less obligation to help Israel in this Debacle - which is what they would be doing.
Having mentioned Ukraine, one of the most significant differences between this Gulf War those of GWHB and GWB is Russia's Position.
They supported the first, had a policy of critical Neutrality in the second while actively supporting the other side in this.
Not only that, they are engaged in a Conflict against a "Proxy" of America and the West. Ironic, given how it shows Relations with Moscow were actually better in the last years of the Cold War than they are now.
There is however one very unfortunate similarity with the second, the complete lack of any UN Mandate. Something I hope individual Leaders and the NATO Secretary General are reminding Trump if or when he tries drawing them into it.
Among the many other unintended Consequences of the Iran War is a huge Windfall for Russia as Countries start buying more Oil from them.
ReplyDeleteGiven the years before the Crisis People ought to have anticipated this and it falls into the same Category as failing to realise that the majority Shia Moslems of Iraq would lean towards Iran once the Sunni Government of Saddam Hussein was removed.
Trump has had to temporarily concede some of the secondary Sanctions on Countries that buy Oil from Russia to stave off economic and humanitarian Disasters. The biggest of which is India with it's huge population of 1.2 Billion People.
Keir Starmer has said how the Strait of Hormuz can be reopened if there was a de-escalation of the Conflict. This might not be as easy as it seems unless the International Community puts pressure on Trump. As a negotiating partner the President has completely forfeit any Talks with Iran.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran has not asked for a ceasefire and doesn't "see any reason why we should talk with [the] Americans, because we were talking with them when they decided to attack us".
In better times the Russians would have acted as both influencer and interlocutor with Iran.
Because that has changed it conspires with how the Contingency with LNG Supplies from Qatar to the EU has been suspended. The Qatari's have stopped LNG Distribution at their huge Ras Laffen LNG Plant because of Damage from an intercepted Missile.
As for any NATO involvement, Article 5 doesn't apply because America was not attacked by Iran and Israel isn't a Member.
The Turks are, but they refused to be involved despite any Provocation and by saying so means they won't be prone to any false Flag incidents meant to ensnare them into it.
Starmer has also said that any British Involvement has to be within legal Constraints.
This brings Attention to the gradually deteriorating legality of the Gulf Wars.
GWHB sought and obtained the necessary Mandate from both his own Congress and the UNSC for his 1990/1 War.
His Son obtained a bipartisan Mandate from Congress, but failed to secure one from the UNSC in 2003.
Trump not only didn't even attempt to obtain Congressional Support for his War he also neglected to approach the UNSC.
So, a lot has changed for the worst in 35 years and now it seems a President can act like a Bull in a China Shop with Foreign Policy and then tell everyone else to clear up the Mess.
When those YouTubers have finished listening to crappy, drug fueled 60's Rock Operas maybe they'd like the get real and watch this ....
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/_42aBSzgY3A?si=H-8j-ouEo64P9N5f
Or this ....
https://youtu.be/Y5xOMO6-9dI?si=FnpvYyCxGX7ClNpp
Why didn't the Trump Administration anticipate this ......?
ReplyDeleteThe potential Food Crisis is worse than anything Bob Geldof had to deal with in the 1980's.
The Gulf exports nearly a third of the essential ingredients for Fertiliser which is now just as stranded as the Oil and LNG.
Band Aid might have made many £Millions to buy emergency Food Aid for Sudan and Ethiopia but the Food had to exist in the first place. In 1984-5 Ukraine was producing the most Food in Europe and many Countries had their own Surpluses.
This Crisis could affect Areas far bigger and more diverse than a couple of Countries in North East Africa. This will involve some who were donor Countries at that time and indirectly affect every other.
And that is a World where the Population has nearly doubled in the 40 years since Live Aid.
A more immediate Crisis is looming in the Gulf States themselves as they have to.import nearly all their Foodstuffs. Supplies are running low in the Regions bigger Cities - which includes Dubai and Abu Dhabi.
It could affect anything up to about 40 Million People.
Anyone who understands the process of Cause and Effect should be aghast at the Israeli attack on the South Pars Gas Field in Iran.
ReplyDeleteIt's the largest of its kind in the World, but it's not just because of the sudden loss of Gas available to the Market the Attack should be condemned for, it's also failing to realise how the Iranians would respond.
Iran had said it will attack the Facilities of the Gulf States who support the American and Israeli War effort if their Infrastructure was attacked.
And that's exactly what they have just done.
This would be disastrous for global Energy Reserves whose Prices spiked today.
The Region is starting to look like the Hellish Landscapes caused by Saddam destroying the Kuwaiti Oil Wells in 1991. That was just confined to one Country in the Gulf. This applies to nearly all of them.
As things widen and deepen Saudi Arabia has threatened to strike Iran.
ReplyDeletePrince Faisal bin Farhan, the Saudi Foreign Minister has said the Saudis are losing patience with Iran as another of their Refineries has been hit and a swarm of Drones were fired at Riyadh.
If this becomes a protracted Conflict it could draw the Houthis into it as they recommence Hostilities with the Saudis. They fought them and their Coalition for years until the Saudis pushed for a Ceasefire after the Houthis began targeting their Oil Facilities. This wasn't until Riyadh and their Allies had inflicted terrible Casualties on Yemen - using Cluster Bombs which are Illegal according to the CCM (Convention on Cluster Munitions) signed by 100 Countries in 2010.
The Qatari Ras Laffan LNG Facility was targeted by Iran causing 17% Damage and will take years to repair. It's estimated that it won't be online at full strength again for years and could impact Supplies until 2031.
Washington has urged Israel not to attack Oil and Gas Facilities because of the effect on global Energy Prices.
Trump is "winding down" the War?
ReplyDeleteAccording to several Sources President Trump is planning to wind down the Iran Conflict, but can we take that seriously?
He has been a bit inconsistent throughout this Conflict, telling us that all their (Americas) objectives have been met, while also saying they will be ratcheting up their Attacks on Iran. Netanyahu has also claimed that the War will be over soon, but the same thing applies.
Then, Trump tells us that the rest of the World will have to "Police" the Straits of Hormuz which suggests he hadn't won the War at all and after he has created this mess he expects everyone else to either clear it up or live with it.
Yeah, like big thanks Donald, except the Seaway was quite safe before you and BB launched your illegal War 3 Weeks ago!
But while he tells us America is winding down the War the Area still fills up with more American Military Assets. The Amphibious Assault Ship USS Tripoli is in situ and capable of launching a Land Assault from the Sea with Marines, fixed Wing VSTOL Aircraft and Helicopters.
Much as anyone welcomes an American Withdrawal it merely highlights the abject pointlessness of it all and leaves a very big Question about the Military Bases in the Region. Will these be closed and withdrawn too?
How might their continued presence be seen by the Iranians who have sustained huge amounts of Damage because of them? Would they countenance that? While America claims they are there to protect the Gulf States, we have just seen how ineffectual they have actually been in achieving that, while some might argue that the States wouldn't have been fired at at all if they weren't there.
The Iranians have made it very clear that their objective is not to be attacked anymore after this, the second time it has happened. They will remember how Trump told the World that his objectives had been met in June last year, so are today's Announcements just more of the same, pending yet another Assault in the future?
Then there's how this will affect Americas Relationship with their Allies. That the Dynamic has changed and now they must go along with anything America does - right or wrong - and have no say or consultation beforehand?
Look at the diminished, squabbling Wreckage that is Europe after American Intrigue caused the War in Ukraine.
So after yet another POTUS has acted like a Bull in a China Shop and everyone else is bruised and battered can he just wash his hands, say "that's all folks" and leave everyone wondering what the hell any of that was about?
And how must the Lebanese be feeling about all of this as South Beirut is starting to look like Gaza?
President Trump is now in a Catch 22 of his own making.
ReplyDeleteHe might declare a Victory and withdraw from the Gulf, except Iran won't accept the continuing Presence of his military Bases there.
But if he withdraws those too that doesn't look like much of a Victory at all.
To obtain an unconditional Surrender - which he has said he wants from the Iranians - he will have to invade the Country on the Ground, fight his way into Tehran and topple/capture the Government, but America doesn't have the Resources to do this and if they tried could be very severely mauled.
Which would be even less of a Victory.
He's in a worse predicament than Richard Nixon was with his "strategic Withdrawal" from Vietnam. America might have left Saigon and the rest of Vietnam, but their Ships and Bases remained in the Region.
Trump says he doesn't want a Ceasefire, but while that might be the only hope of at least ending the current Hostilities it still leaves the Problem of American Bases in the Region.
He could opt for a Korean Solution, if it was mutually accepted by Iran, where America withdrew to it's pre-War Zone and they both agree to disagree. But would Tehran consent to it?
An open Telegram......
ReplyDeleteDear President Donald J Trump (stop)
Many thanks for your War on Iran and the pain it has inflicted on the rest of the World (stop)
My UK Government is now considering Fuel Rationing which could extend to Energy (stop)
The last time we had anything like this was after Prime Minister Chamberlain declared War on Germany (stop)
He did this in accordance with both the Constitutional Laws of Britain and those of the World (stop)
Did you in accordance with those of America and the International Community? (stop)
All this Stuff about Kharg Island.
ReplyDeleteWe continually hear about how America is going to launch a Ground Assault to capture the Iranian Kharg Island.
It's difficult to know from where they might do this.
Any attempt to muster Forces in the Gulf States to cross the Sea and do a Beach Assault would probably be destroyed by Hypersonic Missiles and Drones as they gather.
Any attempt to sail an Assault Force to it would have to go through the Strait of Hormuz.
Except, they've also been telling us that Kharg Island is the Key to opening up the Strait.
So according to their Logic you can't do one without doing the other.
But anyone can see you couldn't do either.
Also, how can capturing an Island in the Gulf open a Passage that is 300 Miles away? It's like saying you could open up the English Channel by capturing Lands End.
And while they talk about all this Ike the Island was some Fortress - nothing more than a huge Installation - it's also home to over 8000 People. It has it's City - Kharg - which has everything you would find in any City, Schools, Hospitals, Recreation Facilities and Shops.
So even if you could somehow Assault the Island the Danger to civilians is obvious.
While Reports are coming in that Iran has fired Missiles into Dimona it isn't clear if that was the City or the Nuclear Processing Reactor.
ReplyDeleteOne thing is clear though, and that is how Iran was far more compliant with their Side of the JCPOA Treaty than Israel ever was when Dimona was being built in the early 1960's. Kennedy had a continuing Battle with David Ben Gurion to make Israel more transparent about it's Nuclear Program.
When Israel finally agreed to it's Inspection it wasn't until they had constructed what amounted to a Film Set of a Reactor for Inspectors to see - complete with fake control Room with Dials giving pretend Readings.
Not Faisal's fault .......or Balfours.
ReplyDeleteThere's a Narrative that is rather like a kind of playground Politics that is no less ignorant and bombastic as GWB's Speech, and completely ignores the Nuances of the Region......
"Everything that is wrong with the Middle East is all Arthur Balfours fault" it continually tells us
It isn't...... and it isn't that of Faisal 1 bin Hussein bin Ali al-Hashimi either.
Firstly, while Balfour wrote his Declaration to Lord Rothschild in 1917 nowhere in it does he mention anything about Israel or even a Jewish State. Even Chaim Weisman never pushed for one either. It also includes a Passage about the Rights of non-Jewish People in the Region.
The Idea was that Jews should be allowed to return to what was once Judea before the 70AD Diaspora and cohabit with the non Jewish People who lived there. Both are Semitic People.
Concurrent to this, and as a thank you for his part in the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Turks Faisal was offered a huge Region ranging from the Turkish border in the north to the City of Mecca and Hejaz region in the South - the Red Sea Coast and what was Palestine in the west to the Persian Border, Gulf and Oman in the east.
He would have been the Hashemite King of nearly all of Arabia and the Levant. His is also a very legitimate Claim going all the way back to Mohammed and whose Family had ruled Mecca since the 10th Century.
Unfortunately, elsewhere was Sikes Picot which would undermine both him and Arthur Balfour and divide the Region into British and French Mandates. Faisal would be made a nominal King of Syria subordinate to the French rather than that of all Arabia.
This meant that while Jews returned to Palestine in the 1920's and 30's rather than having a powerful Arab State on their Doorstep they had a fractured Land run by People with European not Arabic Interests.
Subsequently, when the growing Jewish Community began flexing their Muscles there wasn't very much to stop them. The British garrisoned there tried to keep it from going too far but they were under increasing strain.
If I'm wrong here why did Gamel Nasser try a republican equivalent with his United Arab Republic if it wasn't an attempt to unify Arabs from Egypt to Syria?
In the early 1920's Faisal tried rising up against his French Colonialists but was quashed and deported to Iraq.
After WW2 and the Holocaust British Soldiers in Palestine found themselves fighting against Jewish Terrorists Stern, Irgun, Lehi and the Haganah.
The Sikes Picot Decision was not of Balfours making. He might have been Foreign Minister in David Lloyd George's Government but Lloyd George ran an inner Cabinet that he was not privy to. This mens that while he might have known about the Sikes Picot Plan he had no part in it's formulation.
So, both Faisal and Balfour were betrayed by Sikes Picot while T.E Lawrence returned to Britain feeling like he had been part of it.
What is interesting us how the Source of all the Balfour blaming seems to be American. Is this because most of the funding for Zionist expansionism came from America and the Narrative is a convenient form of scape goating?
As the Palestinians are Key to the dynamic in the Region Faisal was hoping to implement a very inclusive Policy working with the Balfour Declaration.
ReplyDeleteIn 1929, when bloody rioting broke out in Jerusalem between the Arab and Jewish communities, Faisal was highly supportive of the Arab position and pressured the British for a pro-Arab solution of the Palestine crisis. In a memo stating his views on Palestine submitted to the British high commissioner Sir Hubert Young on 7 December 1929, Faisal accepted the Balfour Declaration, but only in the most minimal sense in that the declaration had promised a "Jewish national home".
Faisal stated he was willing to accept the Palestine Mandate as a "Jewish national home" to which Jews fleeing persecution around the world might go, but he was adamant that there be no Jewish state. Faisal argued that the best solution was for Britain to grant independence to Palestine, which would be united in a federation led by his brother, the Emir Abdullah of Trans-Jordan, which would allow for a Jewish "national home" under his sovereignty.
Faisal argued that what was needed was a compromise under which the Palestinians would give up their opposition to Jewish immigration to Palestine in exchange for which the Zionists would give up their plans to one day create a Jewish state in the Holy Land. Faisal's preferred solution to the "Palestine Question", which he admitted might not be practical at the moment, was for a federation that would unite Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Palestine under his leadership.
"Not being practical" meaning he was hamstrung by Sikes-Picot.
Another part of the erroneous Narrative lumps the Hashemites in with the other Monarchist Dynasty's of the Gulf Region.
They aren't, and have far more legitimacy. Even the House of Saud usurped the Hashemites to obtain Power in what would become Saudi Arabia.
All the others - including that of King Farouk of Egypt who was ousted by the Nasserites in the 1950's - can only trace their establishment to the 17th Century.
The Hashemites were very much part of the post WW1 equation while there were other things happening at the time that were also quashed by Sikes-Picot.
Meanwhile, the Threats fly thick and fast.
ReplyDeleteTrump has threatened to destroy all of Iran's Power infrastructure if they don't open the Straits of Hormuz.
Iran has threatened to start attacking Gulf States Power Infrastructure and Desalination Plants.
While it will take anything up to 5 years to repair the Damage that has already been done to Oil and Gas Infrastructure probably the most effective way to reopen the Sea Passage is a cessation and complete American and Israeli Withdrawal.
If the Fighting continues much longer the Damage could become irreparable, while any damage to Water Infrastructure could cause rapid depopulation as People flee the arid Desert Terrain that makes up most of those Countries.
There wouldn't be anyone to repair anything.
Externally, the Strain on Geo-economics could cause it all to go into free fall.
This needs saying ......
ReplyDeleteWhen I interviewed John Simpson in 1992 about events in Eastern Europe in 1989 I was interviewing a BBC Foreign Affairs Editor - not Vaclav Havel the first democratically elected President of Czechoslovakia since the 1930's.
He reports the Story he isn't the Story.
When a History Professor tells a Bunch of Students about Robert the Bruce he or she is an Academic in a Lecture Room - not the Scottish King who defeated the English at Bannockburn.
They tell you about History - they don't make that History.
I think some People in the Info-ocracy get a bit confused and have convinced themselves they are the Subject they deal with.
When I watched "Lincoln" I'm seeing the Actor Daniel Day Lewis playing the famous President - not the famous President.
When Micheal Parkinson interviewed all those Guests on his TV Show he's the Interviewer - not the Guest.
There's something else they do too - using their Dark Arts and a weird form of Alchemy combining Juxtaposition and Subtext - to turn things into something they're not.
Be careful, they might use it to turn you into Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu or anyone else they might be criticising at any given time.
When I came forward and started writing about some of the Stuff you read about here I did so because our People were makers of History and in many instances the right side of that History.
What I found incongruous was how I ended up struggling against some of those in that Ocracy - more so then those I thought we all were critical of.
I've just seen a Video about what will happen once the USS Tripoli and other similar Military Assets arrive in the Region.
ReplyDeleteThe Mission will be to open the Straits of Hormuz and maybe even capture Kharg Island.
Another Scenario has Special Forces Soldiers, CIA and Mossad Agents infiltrate Iranian Society and cause a civilian uprising. Yes, it sounded that imponderable.
The one thing it failed to mention was how, the moment the IRGC discover any of this they will probably open fire on all Gulf Oil and Gas Installations (already in need of up to 5 years repair work to be fully operational again) and begin taking out the desalination Plants.
Unless the Scenarios in the Video have factored in enough emergency Water Supplies for anything up to 50 Million People the Gulf States cease to exist.
Logistics and Populations are just as important in War as the actual Fighting. Something Pete Hegseth and the People making the Video have obviously never been told.
And while all this is going on with one ham fisted YouTube Commentator another, who had claimed to advocate an end to the Conflict tells us that - now Ali Khamenei is dead "the real Nut Jobs" are in charge in Tehran.
If the Iranians see or hear this on what passes for alternative Media in the West - not the mainstream Narrative that that Media criticises - how might that sit with them if or when they would want any sort of Negotiations? Not the most diplomatic Approach is it
Another thing some of these Analysts don't mention is how Iran produces about 9% of the Worlds Oil. Given that most of it flows through the Facility at Kharg Island has the Pentagon even considered what that will do to the World's Fuel and Energy Markets if Kharg can no longer function?
They talk about all this like it was the Plotline for "The Guns of Navarone" except Iran won't be relying on any Coastal Defence Battery with a Range of a few Miles. They will have very accurate Drones and Missiles that can be fired unseen from 100's of Miles inland at who or whatever has landed on their Shore. The main comparison to the doomed Mission at Gallipoli is how any Soldiers who do could come under fire like the Soldiers of 1916, but this might not be from entrenched Troops a few 100 yards away but Projectiles a few 100 Miles away.
Another comparison could be the Bay of Pigs in how the USS Tripoli and other Ships that have had to move within range could be hit and the Marines on the Ground lose their Supplies while Aircraft their floating Base. This is what went wrong in Cuba in 1961 when there r Ships were sunk, leaving the Cuban Exiles with no Ammunition.
As for any supposed infiltration, Iran has changed since the 'Protests' of December and January with the Population rallying to the Government and a national sense of Solidarity. I'm not sure they're going to be quite as receptive to any covert Military Assets like they were the Maquis greeting the SOE in occupied France.
Iran is not an occupied Country.
The USS Tripoli isn't as "expendable" as they claim.
ReplyDeleteWithout it it's Planes couldn't provide effective Escort or Patrol support, while it provides everything for any Ground Forces - from Ammunition to Food, Water, Medical Supplies and Medivac as a floating Field Hospital.
As for the Region, War should not be fought anywhere, least of all somewhere where the Politics are extremely fragile and which completely relies on a very fine balance of artificially created Lifestyles.
If the Infrastructure is destroyed - with no Water or Power - it will have to depopulate very quickly.
You couldn't continue to live there, however luxurious your House or Condominium might be, however much Money or those expensive Cars you have - or even how much Food might be stockpiled in the Supermarkets. The Elevators and Aircon won't work, along with your Fridges and Freezers (crucial in those Temperatures) - as well as those in the Shopping Malls, along with their Barcode Scanners and Debit Card Machines, and neither do the Pumps at the Petrol Stations or the ATM's.
But then, how many desalination Plants run on mains electricity anyway?
People can only survive without Water for just over a Week, maybe even a fortnight, in temperate Climates not somewhere where it can reach 120 Degrees in the shade.
They have next to no natural fresh Water at all.
So, unlike in America or Europe there's no pulling Water from a Stream, River or Lake, while being a Desert means you couldn't go foraging in the Countryside for Fruit, Vegetation or Mushrooms, even Wildlife, and you couldn't grow your own because there are no Gardens or Allotments.
It is a completely man made Environment, totally reliant on Fuel, Energy and processed Water.
The Hashemites ...... Cont'd
Has anyone noticed how most of what was created by Sikes-Picot in Arabia has collapsed in one form or another?
Syria unravelled in 2024, Iraq has never been the same since 2003 and struggled under crippling Sanctions for 12 years before, Lebanon has been chronically dysfunctional since 1975 and the most controversial Country of them all and in the World - Palestine/Israel has been so for 78 years. The other Gulf States have had their own Controversies from "Death of a Princess" to the gruesome Fate of Jamal Khashoggi.
Those in the Region that have endured reasonably intact either weren't created by Sikes-Picot like Turkey, Egypt and Persia/Iran, while the one that was - Jordan - has been run very successfully by a Hashemite King.
Historical precedents .......
ReplyDeleteThere are some historical similarities with other Wars in the industrial Age .....
It cost the Germans what would have been anything from 100,000 to 160,000 USD to build a Tiger Tank and they only made about 1374 during the whole of WW2.
The Soviet Union spent from 24000 to 30000 USD on each T34 and built anything from 57,000 to 80,000 during that War.
So, rather like the disparity between the Cost and Numbers of Drones, Missiles, Interceptors and Aircraft of today's Conflicts the Germans might have built what they thought was a superior Weapon but the Soviets built far more and much cheaper.
Once it was obvious that the Aircraft Carrier had replaced the Battleship in WW2 they realised that a very expensive Ship that took years to build could be sunk by an Aeroplane that took a day to make and for considerably less Money.
During the Battle of Britain a Messerschmitt BF109 could only provide fighter escort over Britain for about 5-10 Minutes before running out of Fuel. A Spitfire could stay in the Air for 1.5 Hours so out flew anything the Luftwaffe used to protect their Bombers.
The American Planes like the Lightning 2 can fly from the Abraham Lincoln for about 1.100 KM before refueling. The problem is, the Lincoln has to remain that far away from Iran to avoid Anti Ship Missiles fired from the Land. Thus, Planes have to refuel on Combat Missions which slows them down, causes large Breaks in Combat time and can be very vulnerable because it has to be done close to the Action.
We saw how so when in the first 48 Hours of War a Boeing KC 135 Stratotanker was shot down over Iraq after a Mission close to the Iranian Border.
1962 revisited.
The one thing that prevented Kennedy from authorising a full Air Assault on Cuba was how Curtis Le May couldn't guarantee that he would destroy all the SS4 Nuclear Missiles before they could be fired at American Cities.
Could whoever Hegseth and Trumps advisors are guarantee the complete destruction of Iran's Missile and Drone Sites before they are launched against the Gulf Oil and Gas Infrastructure and Desalination System?
The Soviet response in 1962 could have caused the Deaths of anything up to 90 million People while that of the IRGC could effectively cause the Gulf Cities and States to depopulate in panic in just a few days as they fled no Water or Electricity.
I thought this needed reiterating and I've written it in block capitals to emphasise it.
ReplyDelete1962 REVISITED
THE ONE THING THAT PREVENTED KENNEDY FROM AUTHORISING A FULL AIR ASSAULT ON CUBA WAS HOW CURTIS LE MAY COULDN'T GUARANTEE THAT HE WOULD DESTROY ALL THE SS4 NUCLEAR MISSILES BEFORE THEY COULD BE FIRED AT AMERICAN CITIES.
COULD WHOEVER HEGSETH AND TRUMPS ADVISORS ARE GUARANTEE THE COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF IRAN'S MISSILE AND DRONE SITES BEFORE THEY ARE LAUNCHED AGAINST GULF OIL AND GAS INFRASTRUCTURE AND DESALINATION SYSTEMS?
IT WAS FOR THE SAME REASON KENNEDY NEVER ORDERED A LAND ASSAULT ON CUBA, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A HUGE MILITARY BUILD UP IN AMERICA'S SOUTH EAST. THAT, AS SOON AS THEY LANDED ON CUBAN BEACHES THE MISSILES WOULD BE LAUNCHED.
WHAT WOULD IRAN'S EQUIVALENT RESPONSE BE IF THEY WERE INVADED?
IRAN DOESN'T HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS BUT ITS CONVENTIONAL ONES USED ON DESALINATION FACILITIES WOULD CAUSE THE RAPID DEPOPULATION OF MILLIONS. CITIES WOULDN'T BE DESTROYED, THEY WOULD BE EMPTIED.
THE SOVIET RESPONSE IN 1962 COULD HAVE CAUSED THE DEATH OF UP TO 90 MILLION PEOPLE WHILE THAT OF THE IRGC COULD EFFECTIVELY CAUSE A NO LESS EXISTENTIAL END OF THE GULF STATES AS THEIR PEOPLE FLEE THE ABSENCE OF WATER OR ELECTRICITY.
War should not be fought anywhere, least of all somewhere where the Politics are extremely fragile and which completely relies on a very fine balance of artificially created Lifestyles.
ReplyDeleteIf the Infrastructure is destroyed - with no Water or Power - it will have to depopulate very quickly.
You couldn't continue to live there, however luxurious your House or Condominium might be, however much Money or those expensive Cars you have - or even how much Food might be stockpiled in the Supermarkets. The Elevators and Aircon won't work, along with your Fridges and Freezers (crucial in those Temperatures) - as well as those in the Shopping Malls, along with their Barcode Scanners and Debit Card Machines, and neither do the Pumps at the Petrol Stations or the ATM's.
But then, how many desalination Plants run on mains electricity anyway?
People can only survive without Water for just over a Week, maybe even a fortnight, in temperate Climates not somewhere where it can reach 120 Degrees in the shade.
They have next to no natural fresh Water at all.
So, unlike in America or Europe there's no pulling Water from a Stream, River or Lake, while being a Desert means you couldn't go foraging in the Countryside for Fruit, Vegetation or Mushrooms, even Wildlife, and you couldn't grow your own because there are no Gardens or Allotments.
It is a completely man made Environment, totally reliant on Fuel, Energy and processed Water.
Subject to verification ....
ReplyDeleteWe also need to be sceptical of Videos appearing on YouTube claiming Iran has knocked out Tel Aviv's Water Supply. There's one which might seem very plausible, with facts and figures but can't be corroborated by any further Searches on the Web.
Israel is just as vulnerable as the Gulf States with Water, and while it might have the Sea of Galilee and Tributaries of the River Jordan these aren't adequate to supply the whole Country particularly Cities like Tel Aviv and Haifa.
However, you do have to ask how much of this info deficit could be due to Censorship. Both Israel and the Gulf States have made it difficult to post anything on the Internet showing social and physical Damage caused by Iran's strikes. The UAE have even threatened Fines and Imprisonment to anyone doing so and a UK Citizen along with 20 others are in this situation.
The Measures seem quite effective, to the point where even with the technical limitations of the time you could see more Film of the War in Vietnam than you can that of the Gulf in the Age of Phone Cameras and Social Media.
Kharg Island (again).
We re still hearing Speculation about the storming of Kharg Island but it's no less difficult to see how now then it was a few days ago.
It is still right at the other end of the Gulf from the Strait of Hormuz, which makes it out of reach of even the most modern Amphibious Assault Ship. Unless they open Hormuz beforehand. While mustering an Assault force on Land adjacent to it makes it vulnerable to Missile and Drone Attacks.
But then, even if it is taken it should be remembered that Iran supplies about 9% of the World's total Oil and Kharg provides about 90% of it.
So, if they capture it and it is damaged in the process the World loses 90% of the 9% of the Oil it needs. The Oil might come from Iran but it's still Oil.
Any military operation on it is as double edged as the Sanctions applied to Russia since 2022.
Russia might not be able to trade with you, but you also can not trade with them.
I can't see how attempting to capture the Island serves any useful purpose at all.
ReplyDeleteTo do so could cause a huge loss of Life. And not just military on either side either because it is home to nearly 9000 People - mostly families of Oil Workers.
Even if it was successful it's a given that Iran will booby trap all the Infrastructure...... that's if it was still intact. They've also said they will mine the whole Island.
Even if the occupying Forces get through that any Oil Ships that might leave will no longer be Iranian or any of the others Tehran have allowed to sail from it. They will then have to run the Hormuz Gauntlet.
Those that currently are are mainly bound for Asia, but many Asian Countries are struggling with even that. The Philippines have announced a State of Emergency while Sri Lanka has said they have Money - but no Oil.
So whatever Trickle that is leaving the Gulf could disappear completely.
And because the Island is so far away from the Straits how could it's Capture have any effect on their opening?
Maybe the Americans want it as propaganda Fodder to show he People at home like it was "Saving Private Ryan" - except the Invasion of June 6th 1944 was into occupied France.
Iran isn't an occupied Country.
At least, it isn't at the moment but would become one if America does invade!
ReplyDeleteThe Propaganda could backfire as Iran starts looking like an occupied Country.....by America!
I'll explain why Trumps attempt to repackage his 15 Point Treaty from a year ago is like Hitler wanting Munich 1938 after his Armies were being thwarted by the Soviet Union......
Hitler agreed in 1938 that if the Czechs were to give him the Sudeten with it's large population of ethnic Germans he would have no more territorial Ambitions. He'd already entered the Rheinland, acquired the Saarland and done his "Anschlus" with Austria.
That, everyone thought, was that.
Then he did the infamous Molotov Ribbentrop Pact with the Soviet Union.
After which he invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, the Benelux Countries, France, the Balkans, the Helennic Islands, North Africa ..... and then the Soviet Union.
He thought Operation Barbarossa would be done in 2 Months and was that confident his Soldiers didn't have Winter Equipment. 2 brutal years later and they were being driven back by the Red Army.
Then, the Allies invaded France.
This must have been when Munich 1938 looked like a much better deal than what they were going to end up with.
Trump and Netanyahu were convinced the Iran War would be finished in a few days after they'd launched "Epic Fury". They were that confident they didn't bother following through with the Deal that was in the Table on February 27th, the day before the War. They also didn't bother consulting Congress or the UNSC.
Hitler was that confident he would defeat the Soviets Molotov-Ribbentrop was History, Munich 1938 a fading Memory.
Nearly 4 Weeks later and Trump and Netanyahu's War isn't going to Schedule. Not only that, but it has unleashed utter Chaos around the World, causing Fuel and Energy Crises everywhere and global Food Security is more threatened than it has ever been.
Gulf Allies are seeing the Guarantees that held their fragile Societies and Glass Palaces disappear and even the very source of their Existence - Water - is in the Balance. They are also realising that Americas so called 'Protection' isn't quite what it was hyped up to be and maybe even a Liability because it turned them into Targets.
All of this must be making Trump wish they could go back to the Treaty that was on offer last year, when things seemed a lot more straight forward and far less painful.
He also needs to remember that Iran is now an aggrieved Party that has seen their Cities bombed, their Leader killed along with 1000's of People and untold damage to their Infrastructure.
ReplyDeleteThat is what they would bring to any Negotiations that they wouldn't have a year ago.
Munich was brokered by Britain and France in 1938. How different were the British and French positions only a few years later? How different was the Soviet Position to what it was during Molotov Ribbentrop?
Vast Damage and Slaughter everywhere!
What's happened to Google all of a sudden?
ReplyDeleteJust asked it how many Troops did Britain have in Palestine in the 1930's and the Results were utter crap.
Lots of those Discussion Forums - Reddit, Facebook, Quora etc, a few vaguely relevant Discussion Sites ......... and what has any of it got to do with Climbing?
Nothing relevant, not even a Wiki Entry!
Would Faisal or his Successor of a unified Arab Kingdom have been a useful Ally in WW2?
ReplyDeleteYes, he would.
Imagine how many Resources the Germans would have had to use in the vastness of Arabia and the Levant if they were?
That the Arabs could have used the same Skills they used against the Turks in WW1 against any Germans who arrived there?
It was rumoured that Faisal's Son Ghazi harboured Nazi Sympathies, but how much of that was due to the Betrayal they felt after Sikes-Picot? If that hadn't happened they would have had a much friendlier disposition to both the British and French, while the Absence of the French in what became Syria would mean no Vichy Soldiers during the War. The French who were there split between free and Vichy Supporters.
The Arabs of Arabia and the Levant would have been very useful during the North Africa Campaign too sending Fighters to support the British War Effort there.
It would have completely changed the Dynamic between Arabs and Jews - who would have worked with each other rather than fight. This would have been very useful as Jews in Europe faced worsening Hostility in the 1930's. Faisal openly supported a Policy of accommodating Jews fleeing persecution while the Jews would have felt a sense of involvement in his Kingdom.
I mentioned before how he was prevented from doing this because of the constraints imposed by Sikes-Picot.
And because the Situation in Palestine would have been very different there would have been no Arab Revolt against the British from 1936 to 1939 which required up to 50,000 British Soldiers who could have been deployed elsewhere. This, of course also applies to any French Troops too who were in Syria and Lebanon.
Meanwhile, something else that needs verification are claims that 15 American Bases have been evacuated in the last 48 Hours due to huge Iranian Attacks.
ReplyDeleteAgain, nothing on Google about it from any reputable Sources and no Reportage from Outlets like Al Jazeera. The Times of India mention it via YouTube, but they tend to hype and sensationalise Stories.
You might find other YouTube Videos about it while there is an Article published by Tass, except they are a Russian News Agency so how reliable might that be?
There are residual Reports saying something similar, but these are from 3 Weeks ago, so not exactly current.
And still nothing about any destruction to Tel Aviv's Water Supply.
Both these are so momentous no amount of Censorship could keep a lid on it because People are going to notice.
If People want to be taken seriously as alternative Media they can at least publish corroborated Facts.
The Video about the Water Supply was uploaded at least 24 Hours ago. If something like that had happened we'd be seeing Articles with Spokespeople from all sorts of relief Agencies by now.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, something that is verifiable is how the Fuel crisis is begining to bite in Australia.
ReplyDeleteUp to 500 Service Stations have reported near empty while about 250 have closed completely due to lack of Diesel at the Pumps.
The lack of Diesel is extremely serious because most Trucks run on it, along with Public Transport.
Australia particularly needs it's Haulage and Passenger Industries because it is huge, with 1000's of Miles of nothing in the Hinterland dividing Cities on the Coastlines.
Finally starting to get Confirmation that American Bases in the Region have been rendered uninhabitable and are abandoned.
ReplyDeletePersonnel have either relocated to Hotels in the Region or gone to Europe.
A Situation that isn't ideal as one Interviewer in this Article tells us .....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/u-troops-abandon-military-bases-151423263.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJwl7b2PCz6alF233GNRs8h7-FhI1rO9O63rweDCJUbfh6ELtDqEp_7__Fn215S3VNy6nbhZc2Cq_Zd2cq-y_O9RTOU2FJeb5pdIo4rm34lWR7XWci1HwZiXLtspZdBtcE2qT8ebyAukkPMVEY9h1bymkAusGmNOBxT2ljyImh9k
And, no Netanyahu has not "surrendered" as another YouTube Channel tells us.
ReplyDeleteIn the continuing Horror that is being done to Lebanon he is carving a "Buffer Zone" in the South of the Country which some are interpreting as a colonising Zone. The Idea being he is busy turning South Lebanon into part of greater Israel.
I wish these People would give us the facts instead of speculative Nonsense that could get them closed for disseminating Disinformation.
As things go from bad to worse we still get these People on YouTube talking like it somehow doesn't affect them.....
ReplyDeleteDuring the 1962 Missile Crisis as Tension piled upon Tension Curtis LeMy said to Kennedy; "You're in a pretty bad fix".
JFK's Response: "Well, you're in it with me!"
Maybe these Channels broadcast from the Planet Zog, or even a Space Station that will fly away when the Balloon goes up. They don't and everyone running them or appearing on them will be just as affected as you or me.
ReplyDeleteEven the AI People who will just disappear once the Electricity runs out.
Whatever any of them might put in those horrible Clickbait Thumbnails.
And having mentioned the Missile Crisis, our People need that unless than a fortnight. The Iran crisis that threatens to become far bigger than just Iran has gone in fir 4 Weeks now, while the Miasma it stems from has dragged in for 23 years.
What's taking them so long?
And what's all this "cry Uncle" Nonsense?
ReplyDeleteAm I listening to a serious Discussion about Lebanon or some old Crap by the Who?
ReplyDeleteRather like Gorbachev could say no one said anything about those Countries joining NATO no one said anything to me about Rock Operas and Silver Balls.
What somehow makes all this poignant is what is happening in Australia right now. As Fuel Stations close through lack of Petrol and Diesel it's starting to look like the Plotline of a bunch of Mel Gibson Movies!
Similarly, I'm not sure what any of that might have to do with PAYE at Asda!
(PAYE = Pay as you earn - Income Tax deducted at Source)
Hello George!
I remember recommending those Australian TV Actors and Pop stars watch those Mel Gibson Movies because we seem to be edging closer to them.
ReplyDeleteI've said several times, I wish I was listening to that Tina Turner Song on our Album in 1990 with a very different Zeitgeist than in 2026 for a whole bunch of very understandable Reasons.
As for George, what feels like many years ago now I wrote a huge Article about why we shouldn't go to War in Iraq. It was 2002/3 and we had those huge Demonstrations in Cities around the World.
I sent it via email to someone I knew in the New York Media Scene and it was used as the basis for NPR Radio Shows on the Subject and Print Media, including the New York Times.
But here, it was nothing was happening, like it always seems to be, regardless of what might be happening everywhere else.
And the so called alternative Media Weaseliness continues .....
ReplyDeleteWould one of them like to explain what the "current Status Quo" is? An Oxymoron if ever I heard one and inaccurate because the Status Quo that had prevailed for Decades meant Gulf States did not attack each others Oil Infrastructure where it would force a global Energy Crisis, and you didn't have an all out direct War with Iran.
Iran fought their War with Iran and Saddam did his Damage in Kuwait, but even that never caused the growing Crisis we face now.
And World Agriculture wasn't confronted by the estimated 30% shortfall in Fertiliser Products.
What we have been seeing in the last 4 Weeks is anything but the "Status Quo".
I get very annoyed about this because it's a glib and dubious way of obtaining some fake moral high Ground.
It's a completely erroneous Narrative.
The "Status Quo" was what got everyone to the safest the World had ever been in the modern era at the end of the 1980's. It was also what finally led to the Oslo Accords. Yitzhak Rabin and Yasur Arafat were part of that Status Quo as they represented their People for Decades. In the dreadful years since one was killed and the other systematically undermined, while the Status Quo got replaced by the sort of People who have spent the last 30 years making a horses arse of everything.
And the Status Quo did everything to avoid a War with Russia - "proxy" or otherwise, aimed specifically at Moscow - particularly in Europe.
If continually referring to "the Status Quo" is a subtextual Allusion to a certain British Rock Band I'd have loved to have talked with Dmitri Medvedev about the era of classic British Rock Music, our part in all that, how another of our People typified it and that 1982 Concert.
ReplyDeleteBut then, I'd have also liked to have done the same with Vaclav Havel about Lou Reed. That's while I also talk about Arthur Balfours part in the Creation of Czechoslovakia and that all important second Passage in the Balfour Declaration.
Who knows, we might have raised a Glass of that famous Czechish Pilsner Beer to what would become the Oslo Accords.
What I can't understand about any of this is how stupid some of our Leaders have been.
ReplyDeleteWhen it became apparent that the unipolar Order was ending and other Countries were in the Ascendancy those Leaders ought to have used OUR (yes, because that's who they belong to) resources to work with them not squander them fighting them.
We have seen them do the latter so many times, while the War in Ukraine began a Process that was even worse. That they were prepared to squander other People resources to do so too and create a situation which makes it near impossible to undo the Damage. They must have known how much that War would wreck Britain, Europe and Scandinavia as we have seen with Economies in decline and political Currency devalued. Not only that but what were once proud Neutralities have been drawn into the Miasma.
While this went on there was the growing BRICS Movement as the rest of the World began formulating an alternative to the increasingly toxic Anglo-Euro-American Axis.
And then came the Wars on Iran with so many unintended Consequences it makes the Blowback from Ukraine feel like a mild Breeze.
Suddenly, even BRICS Countries are being impacted like they never have before, with everything threatened - from Fuel to Food Production - and even the potential for a humanitarian Catastrophe in an entire Region that could suffer from deliberately inflicted Drought.
So we have this twisted Logic that would rather induce Conflict which destroys everything and not use everything to build a World for the realities of the 21st Century.
One Question I have about any supposed ground Invasion of Iran ......
ReplyDeleteHow is America going to be able to do this - while 'protecting' the Gulf States - if they can't even hold their Bases in the Region? They had to withdraw from 13 of them due to Iranian Missile and Drone Attacks.
They had Bases in Thailand, the Philippines and Okinawa during the Vietnam War - along with 8 'in-country' in Vietnam itself. Some of the latter - not all - were attacked. They also had 500,000 Troops on the Ground and Conscription back home. Throughout this they had several Aircraft Carriers in Situ.
They still lost, even though their Bases in the Region kept functioning for the Duration.
And despite bombing North Vietnamese Cities and Towns into oblivion they never once attempted an Invasion.
The western Approach to Iran Is very similar to that of Russia......
ReplyDeleteIt forgets that Iran is an ancient Country 1000's of years old and one of the oldest continuous Civilisations. It might be an Islamic Republic now but there are still People who subscribe to the Zoroastrian Faith. The West somehow expects them to abandon all of that.
This was how they regarded Russia and Ukraine, when the EU - founded in 1993 with the Treaty of Maastricht and Origins in the 1950's - expected Ukraine as it was in 2013 to abandon 1200 years of history, heritage and culture it had shared with Russia for the sake of a Cooperation Agreement.
During this Negotiations the EU Council and Commission excluded Russia who had legitimate Concerns.
Moscow had had a Customs Union with Kiev effectively creating a free trade Area going back to the Soviet era and continuing with the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) but with Roots that were far older. Cites and Oblasts like Kiev, Novgorod, Yaroslavl and Starya Ladoga have been linked for over a thousand years.
Because of this they were worried that if Ukraine negotiated something similar with the EU they would be flooded with cheap, Duty free Goods from Europe coming via Ukraine.
The EU couldn't seem capable of accommodating these concerns so excluded Russia from the Talks and were forcing Yanukovych to choose either/or.
Combine this with planned NATO expansion into Ukraine - again to the exclusion of Russia - and the Consequences are quite predictable.
So, there seems to be a similar Attitude towards Iran where they wanted to repeat what was done in 1953 and install a compliant Leader who would turn Iran into a Vassal State like it was something else created by Sikes-Picot.
I've mentioned previously why Sikes-Picot was a Mistake and went against the grain of a similarly ancient Arab heritage, and we are seeing the Results of that now.
(Groan) We're still being told that the Iranians have attacked and destroyed Israeli desalination Plants that supply Tel Aviv.
ReplyDeleteAnd just like before there's nothing anywhere on Google to corroborate this.
I'd rather they told us about the verifiable degradation of Water Supplies to Lebanon done by Israel, just like they did with Gaza.
The western Approach to Iran Is very similar to that of Russia......
ReplyDeleteIt forgets that Iran is an ancient Country 1000's of years old and one of the oldest continuous Civilisations. It might be an Islamic Republic now but there are still People who subscribe to the Zoroastrian Faith. The West somehow expects them to abandon all of that.
This was how they regarded Russia and Ukraine, when the EU - founded in 1993 with the Treaty of Maastricht and Origins in the 1950's - expected Ukraine as it was in 2013 to abandon 1200 years of history, heritage and culture it had shared with Russia for the sake of an EU Cooperation Agreement.
During this Negotiations the EU Council and Commission excluded Russia who had legitimate Concerns.
Moscow had had a Customs Union with Kiev effectively creating a free trade Area going back to the Soviet era and continuing with the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) but with Roots that were far older. Cites and Oblasts like Kiev, Novgorod, Yaroslavl and Starya Ladoga have been linked for over a thousand years.
Because of this they were worried that if Ukraine negotiated something similar with the EU they would be flooded with cheap, Duty free Goods from Europe coming via Ukraine.
The EU couldn't seem capable of accommodating these concerns so excluded Russia from the Talks and were forcing Yanukovych to choose either/or.
Combine this with planned NATO expansion into Ukraine - again to the exclusion of Russia - and the Consequences are quite predictable.
So not only did the 2013 Talks show the EU hide it's inadequacies behind a facade of Exclusion they also failed to empathise with the Russian position on NATO. If they are excluded from both who are both lining up against?
So, there seems to be a similar Attitude towards Iran where they wanted to repeat what was done in 1953 and install a compliant Leader who would turn Iran into a Vassal State like it was something else created by Sikes-Picot.
I've mentioned previously why Sikes-Picot was a Mistake and went against the grain of a similarly ancient Arab heritage, and we are seeing the Results of that now.
Hello Pascal!
"Coles", "3 ways" etc .....
ReplyDeleteCan't we watch a YouTube Video about the growing Fuel = Food Crisis in Australia without it being perverted with all that "Tommy" Subtext?
I'd like to put some of those People in the same Room as Nikita Khrushchev and Andrei Gromyko like it was 1962 and watch as their lightweight Fakery is demolished. Even Kennedy struggled when he met the Soviet Premiere.
They're a bit like those EU Representatives from the Council and Commission who were either too inadequate and/or devious to allow themselves to be in the same Room with Sergei Lavrov and Vladimir Putin in 2013.
What annoys me at the moment - apart from the complete lack of Protest at the illegal War that should be like those we remember from 2002/3 about Iraq - is how, given the devastating seriousness of the Consequences, those Whitehouse Press Briefings still look like polite Conversations.
ReplyDeleteCaroline Leavitt should be absolutely inundated with Questions about the legality of the War, the Omani Statement just before it started and if America ever intended to repair the World after the Havoc it unleashed in it?
What astonishes me is how Trump always seems completely nonchalant when he talks about all this.
ReplyDeletePresumably he's aware that the growing Crisis could cause some Countries to lose their Social Cohesion? There are a few that are close to that including Americas biggest South China Sea Ally the Philippines, while even Australia isn't just looking at a Fuel Crisis that has closed 100's of Gas Stations, it also could face a Food Crisis as 65% of its Fertilisers come from the Gulf.
But when asked anything about any of this he either seems obscenely indifferent about it or wants to talk about Golden Curtains in the Whitehouse or Marco Rubio's Shoes.
Last time I looked that Country in the Gulf Region that was invaded by Saddam was called Kuwait....... not Queue Wait!
ReplyDeleteAnd now Trump has told any Country, including Britain, that hasn't been directly involved in his illegal War to get their own Oil from the Strait of Hormuz.
ReplyDeleteHe acts like a Bull in a China Shop (if you'll excuse the expression) then expects everyone else to clear up his Mess.
The Straits of Hormuz would be working just fine if you and your ICC Indicted Friend Mr Netanyahu hadn't launched your illegal War at the end of February Mr President.
Meanwhile, as the Lemmings in Washington prepare in all seriousness for a ground Invasion of Iran one American Spokesperson was trying to impress us with the Battle Array being assembled for the Operation.
There's no doubting the Military Prowess of the Marines and 82nd Airborne being deployed along with some of the Special Forces Assets there but among those he listed were Radar Operational Units and others whose Title seemed somewhat misleading.
Radar Operators are not frontline Soldiers, they are Men and Women who sit at Screens with Headphones. Others might be anciliary support Units.
And on it goes, until I was waiting for him to start reeling off Catering Units, Clerical Staff, Chaplains - maybe even Janitors and the rather unflatteringly called "Shit Detail".
Everything to beef up the Numbers, but very few will do any actual Fighting.
To give you an Idea of how inadequate it could be, while there might be "40,000" American Troops in the Gulf this is a drop in the Ocean compared to the 250,000 that were in Iraq in 2003. Britains Contribution was bigger than the entire American Force in 2026, but even that many wasn't enough to placate Iraq with about a quarter of Iran's population, in a Country a quarter of the size.
And while Trump claims his Soldiers will only be in Iran for "a few Weeks" the Coalition was in Iraq for 9 years.
Even if they assembled an equivalent Force that was ranged against Saddam in 1990/1 it took 6 Months to do so. Given how much damage has been done to the World's Economy, Fuel and - above all - Food Systems in just the one Month the War has gone on for what would that look like after half a year?
And that would be before the Invasion even started.
Not that they could because the only route by Land might have been Iraq, except the Government in Baghdad have fallen out somewhat with the Americans because of a Skirmish between US Soldiers and those of a Shia Unit of the Army. This resulted in several Iraqis being killed.
And just when you thought it couldn't get any more grim Chechen Warlord Ramzan Khadyrov has announced his Fighters will mobilise to join the War if the Americans invade. His Army is probably one of the most formidable in the Russian Federation who have fought in Ukraine for the last 4 years, while their Involvement could have serious ramifications in the Caucasus given the mixed loyalties in the region.
ReplyDeleteHis announcement must have caused a few raised Eyebrows in Baku.
The rest of the World should be watching it very closely too. Chechnya might be an autonomous Region but it is still part of the Russian Federation. This means if Kadyrov's Men do engage in Combat with American Soldiers in Iran that is a direct War with Russia.
It also prompts questions about others in the Caucasus. The Ossetians are an Iranic People very loyal to Russia as we saw in 2008, while Arminians have no love for the Azeris (who support Israel) after Nagorno Karabakh was effectively eliminated recently.
..........
The Special Relationship....
King Charles is due to visit America in April to try and salvage what might be left of the Anglo-US Relationship.
In a rather battered state since several Spats between President Trump and Prime Minister Starmer it used to be seen as a cornerstone of western Relations.
While it is important it shouldn't be used as a Conduit to allow anything and everything America might demand of us. Stamer has been right to keep as much distance between Britain and President Trumps illegal War on Iran, and Trump is wrong to take our Support of it for granted.
Someone wouldn't be much of a Friend if they were intent on leading you astray would they.
There was a time when British Input on American Policy was very positive and influential - particularly during the Kennedy Era - but a lot of it has been rather one sided in recent years. How much influence Tony Blair had on GWB is a moot point in this Regard.
So, what Charles can patch up in April remains to be seen, but we should not end up being seen by the rest of the World as something akin to Israel in our dealings with the US.
Meanwhile, while some of those YouTubers have been playing their "Proxy War" in the BS20 Theme Park .........
ReplyDeleteFor example, do we have our own Choke Points here, like the one on the Marina?
ReplyDeleteWhen all those YouTubers have finished pretending they don't read this ......
ReplyDeleteThe roaring Silence .......
ReplyDeleteWhile the War threatens a Food Crisis worse than anything Band Aid or the Artistes doing Live Aid raised Money and Awareness against because it will affect far more Countries and People Celebrities seem conspicuously Quiet on the Subject.
And when I say the Subject I don't mean the Preamble to the current conflict I mean the illegal War that was launched on Iran by Israel and America in June last year. They have had 8 Months to formulate some sort of Statement expressing Concern at the increasingly dangerous and illegal Foreign Policies waged by their Governments.
The War last year was nearly 6 Months before the so called "Protests" in Iran and the Government crackdown everyone fell over each other to deplore.
The 2 Horsemen ......
ReplyDeleteThe last American Election gave the World 2 Choices ......
Joe Biden could have continued to run, but even if he had won would probably have been removed from Office via the 25th Amendment and Kamala Harris would have become President.
Or, Donald Trump would have won.
If it had been the former we could very well have had a Nuclear Exchange with Russia in the first few Months as some Commentators had feared because of the complete lack of Dialogue with Moscow. Ironic given how the 'Red Phone' (which was originally a Teleprinter) with the Kremlin was installed by another Democratic Party President -JFK after the Cuban missile Crisis.
If it was the latter (which it has been) the World looks set to do 1929 revisited and a Famine on an epic Scale.
Given that we've already had Pestilence via the Pandemic that could have caused the complete collapse of Civilisation let's hope we don't end up with the 4th Horseman..... who is?
Guys, America has 4 Ivy League Colleges, it's the wealthiest Country in the World, put a Man on the Moon and Probes into Deep Space, became the most powerful Country on the Planet in just 250 years since it's independence and has 330 Million People and you couldn't find 2 better Candidates than Joe Biden and Donald Trump?
There was a glimmer of hope that a Kennedy could have become President with RFK jnr -particularly if he had teamed up with Tulsi Gabbard as a running mate, but both got drawn into the Trump Administration.
How either can go along with this Policy is a question for them given how Tulsi made it her own Policy not to get involved in any more "stupid Wars". Indeed, it was her Briefing to the President nearly a year ago that told him Iran posed no Nuclear Threat, which Trump ignored.
It is thought that she might be the next to resign after the Departure of her Intelligence Colleague Joe Kent a couple of Weeks ago. I hope so.
So, with all this going on the last American Election could very well be THE last American Election, which would be a very sad indictment in the state of the Union and Democracy generally.
Who knows, Trump might abolish the republic completely and become Emperor Donaldus Caesar.
If so, other Cabinet Members might be falling over themselves to be Marcus Junius Brutus and Gaius Cassius Longinius.
I was a big Fan of the satirical TV Program called "Spitting Image" but I never thought Reality would end up being more surreal than the Show.
Meanwhile, the UK Foreign Minister is hosting an emergency Summit with 60 Nations on the Energy Crisis and how to reopen the Straits of Hormuz.
ReplyDeleteRather than spend Money we - or any of the others - can't afford on what would be a futile Military attempt to do so, and clearing up Trumps Mess in the Process (which adds insult to Injury), I'd have thought the Answer was quite a simple one.
All those present denounce in the most emphatic and certain terms the illegal War that was launched by Israel and America.
Tehran hasn't completely closed the Strait and does allow Shipping not connected with America and Israel through.
If all those Countries remove themselves from the Policy that started the War - and do it very publicly - Iran would probably allow their Ships through too.
It's called Diplomacy and how it can be used as Leverage!
Oh, and I'd rather see the Fuel and Energy that would be used to power any futile Military Operation (Fuel for those Planes, Helicopters, Warships, Vehicles etc and Energy for the Buildings that would be used to fight it) be used to fuel up Food Distribution and Infrastructure at Home during the Crisis.
The Military is the biggest consumer of Fuel in any Country.
If all that comes from this Summit is yet another "Coalition" or some Task Force charged with mounting a very uncertain military Campaign that could end up looking like Gallipoli we should raise our Arms in despair. If it does and it burns up what is left of our Fuel Reserves and further antagonising the Iranians I shudder to think what could happen to the social Cohesion of the countries most affected as Shops start to empty and what is left in them becomes too expensive for most People.
Families have already been hit as they begin cancelling this year's Holidays, not just abroad but also travelling in this Country.
There's no Ambiguity about how illegal that War is whatever anyone might think of the Regime in Tehran, and the international Community should be no less ambiguous in its condemnation if it.
They should decide that America and Israel are a run away Train and unless we decouple from it we all die in the Trainwreck.
So, not only should they denounce the War completely for what it is they should also form a Delegation to meet with the Iranians and convince them of this.
Our Relationship with America changed when George W Bush said "Jump" and Tony Blair said "How high?" It's been like that ever since and isn't a besieged Britain where Churchill negotiated Lend Lease with Roosevelt or David Ormsby Gore was in the Oval Office imparting very useful Advice during the Missile Crisis.
Israel looks increasingly like a lost cause but if America can be made to feel isolated it could climb down from it's Hubris Ladder and eat a very large Slice of Humble Pie. It takes a lot more Courage to admit to being wrong.
Particularly if Americans start gazing enviously across the Detroit and St Lawrence Rivers and see Canadian Fields growing Food, Shops stocked with affordable Groceries, no Queues at the Gas Stations, Public Transport working and Canadians flying on available civilian Flights.
It might force them to select some decent Candidates in an Election for a change instead of the dismal ones of late who have caused all these recent Crises. Being what it is America has no excuse not to.
Maybe after the Summit has formed a Delegation to meet the Iranians and possibly Representatives from Oman they could all draught an Agreement Document called the Joint Gulf Safe Transit Treaty (J,G,S,T,T).
ReplyDeleteOnce achieved signatory Country Ships register their AIST Signal (Automatic Identification System Transponder) which tells Iran and Oman who is sailing through the Gulf.
And tracking Vessels isn't difficult these days either when even an App on your Phone can do so. I've got one called Marine Traffic which tells me who any Ship is - even some smaller Sailing Yachts - and where it is at any given time.
This means that, not only could you, the Iranians and Omanis know which Ships are sailing in the Gulf they'd also know if any tries cheating the Treaty by either switching off the AIST after they've left or sails to a non signatory (hostile) Port.
If they do they either pay a large Penalty if they sail to the Gulf again or are stopped completely.
And there is an existing Convention the Treaty could incorporate .....
ReplyDeleteNeutral shipping during war is primarily governed by the 1907 Hague Convention (XIII) on Neutral Powers in Naval War, which dictates that neutral powers must apply restrictions impartially to belligerents. Key rights include protected passage, provided they avoid contraband, violation of blockades, or engaging in unneutral service.
Key Aspects of Neutral Shipping Law (Hague XIII, 1907):
Impartiality: Neutral powers must treat all belligerents equally regarding port entry and restrictions.
Port Rules: Belligerent warships in neutral ports are restricted to 24 hours, except for emergencies (weather, damage repairs, or fuel replenishment to reach home port).
Contraband and Capture: Neutral merchant ships cannot be destroyed or captured unless carrying contraband, though they are subject to search by belligerents.
Prohibitions: A neutral power can forbid a belligerent vessel from entering its waters if that vessel has previously violated neutrality.
Exceptions: These rules can be superseded by United Nations Security Council decisions.
1928 Havana Convention: Reaffirms these principles, strengthening rules on merchant vessel treatment.
Historical Context and Related Laws:
Blockades: Neutral ships can be intercepted if they are trying to break a valid blockade.
Repairs: Damaged ships may repair in neutral ports, but only enough to make them seaworthy.
It should be remembered that we and any others in the forthcoming Summit are neutral Powers during this War.
Trump can swear as much as he likes, the Strait is closed to Shipping connected with America and Israel because of his War. It wasn't before while the horrible thing is, until other Countries remove any Ambiguity they are currently lumped in with them.
ReplyDeleteThis is why the planned Summit of those Countries needs to make their Neutrality very clear.
The terrible and catastrophic Consequences of the War that go into every corner of the World is why it would never have obtained a Congressional or UN Mandate. Had it been subjected to Scrutiny and all sorts of Input considered - from Geo-economics to Food production and distribution, the Humanitarian Impact and even that on the Ecosphere - it would never have passed.
I suspect Trump knew all this while I don't think Netanyahu particularly cares which is why he side stepped both Congress and the UN.
Oh, and if you're reading this in America the illegal War is burning from 40 million to 71 million Gallons of Fuel every two Weeks while you are seeing Petrol and Diesel go up in price by the Day. While your Teamsters are paying more and more to fuel their Food Trucks and all this shows when you visit the shopping Mall.
If an 18 Wheeler does about 6 to 8 Miles on a single gallon of Fuel that would be 8 miles x 71 million Gallons = 568,000,000 haulage Miles. Aviation Fuel is a Kerosene based formula very similar to Diesel.
The Food Crisis will happen in several Stages....
The first and most immediate will be when increases in Fuel Prices will affect logistics and distribution. Transporting it from import to Wholesale and then Retail.
The increased Energy Cost for the Infrastructure of all these - from Port installations to your local Shop.
And the cost to the Consumer getting to and from the Shop as a lot of it is now done in out of town Shopping Malls.
The second will be later this year at harvest time. This is because Fertilisers that would have been used now during the planting Season have been stranded in the Gulf so countries which rely on them will have to use barren Soil. Australia suffers from it and uses lots of Fertiliser.
One Crop that will be badly affected is Rice as India - one of its biggest producers - also relies on the Fertilisers and Nitrogen that used to flow from the Gulf.
Then there's what could happen next year as less Seed Crop was produced in this.
Not forgetting that what was designated as Seed Crop for this year will now have to be sold as Food.
Is what anything I'm suggesting to tackle some of this "radical"?
No it isn't, because we are now seeing why no American or allied State ever attacked Iran. Saddam did, but the Impact was kept mostly to the Region, unlike the Disaster happening now.
What America and Israel have done is extremely radical while there are those of us who are desperate to see the equilibrium restored and maintained.
And while we had our decades long "special relationship" with America that was an America that kept within the confines of its own and international Law. Now it does neither.
If the Western Hemisphere hadn't become so Americentric with Washington calling all the Shots two Countries that could have warned any US President against a War with Iran would be Britain and France.
ReplyDeleteThe Straits of Hormuz aren't the only only Choke Point in the World's Seas as we have one right here..... the Strait of Dover.
Or the Pas De Calais if you are french.
It's about the same width as Hormuz and during World War 2 was dubbed "Hellfire Corner" because British and German guns made it a very dangerous Sea to navigate. The Guns, which could fire into the Positions of the other and did a lot of damage to Dover and Calais, were old Naval Guns, taken from Warships and could be fired at Shipping passing through.
It became so notorious that Sailors whose Ships were mustering at Southend on Sea refused to sail through it, while there was the infamous "Channel Dash" which saw the Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Prinz Eugen make a dash through it from Brest in France to their home Port of Wilhelmshaven.
Indeed, it became so effective it contributed to bottling up the German fleet - particularly Merchantmen and Submarines - for most of the War. They had a choice, either run the Channel Gauntlet or sail up the North Sea and perilously close to the British Fleet at Scapa Flow.
Or not sail.at all.
Submarine Nets made it impassible to German U Boats and it wasn't until Germany controlled the Ports of western France they could unleash their Battle of the Atlantic.
So Britain and France could have counselled a President against a War that would cause a similar Blockage.
It's no good Trump getting all hot under the Collar about Hormuz now. He should have consulted London and Paris first.
I hate to say "I told you so, but I told you so!"
ReplyDeleteIt looks like some Commentators are finally catching up with some of what I've been saying here......
Here's what I said about the potential Refugee Crisis if a War with Iran happened ....
Metro Wynn Presents19 February 2026 at 22:52
"And has he (Trump) even considered the chronic Refugee Crisis his War on Iran would cause?
Leaders in the Region have all expressed concern at the prospect of millions of Iranians fleeing the Conflict flooding their Countries.
And while that includes Turkish Leader Recep Erdogan how about some of the less viable Countries? Is President Trump entertaining the Idea that 100's of 1000's of Iranians throw themselves at the mercy of the Taliban in Afghanistan (another of Americas foreign Policy disasters). Would Iraq (more of the same) be able to accommodate them as they flood into theirs?
And there was a Reason why millions of Afghanis fled to Iran
While southern Europe saw 1000's of Libyans risk everything to cross the Mediterranean in flimsy Boats how about any Iranians doing the same across the Persian Gulf?
Can the strained political Situation in Europe which has seen the rise of Nationalism endure yet another Refugee Crisis?
Does any of this sound like the stability President Trump claims to want in his recent Comments?"
Here's what I said about the Straits of Hormuz and how vulnerable they were as long ago as the 19th of January ....
"The Fate of the Strait of Hormuz could be either/or.
If Government loyalists prevailed in south east Iran they might close the Seaway to do severe damage to western/NATO economies that rely on Fuel shipped through there. If it fell to the Rebels they might do the same to damage Tehran's Chinese Allies. The Passage is only 21 Miles wide at it's narrowest, which is about the same as the English Channel. During WW2 German and British Heavy Guns fired at each other for most of the War, damaging Ports, Ships and Towns on each side. It became known as "Hellfire Corner", and this was in an Era before guided Missiles and Drones. Look at what the Houthis did to the Red Sea and Eliat with their comparatively cheap Projectiles."
And Gulf Shipping generally. This was written on February 1st
"No Gulf State - however neutral - is going to be able to affordably export Oil while a War exists with America and Israel against Iran. It would be extremely dangerous for any Shipping to sail through it, particularly while Sanctions busting Russian Ships are being intercepted. Suddenly no Ship would be above suspicion and the potential for Chaos is huge.
Shipping Insurance Companies are very strict about Vessels sailing in Warzones and charge very high Premiums for any that do, while Crews and Owners would be reluctant to do so anyway.
So, Iran might not have to seal off the Straits of Hormuz for this to happen. The mere fact that the Area has become a Warzone will do this.
You only have to look at what happened in the Black Sea and how "Grain Corridors" had to be negotiated to allow Ships to carry Ukrainian Produce to the rest of the World. All Ships were at risk - not just Russian and Ukrainian ones - while we're seeing the impact on Food Prices everywhere.
The subsequent Cost of Living Crisis has devoured People's Incomes, Welfare, Pensions and Life Savings enough as it is without this extra Layer of Disruption."
So, I think you might find some of us do know what we're talking about here, and maybe if certain People stopped being patronising and condescending we might all make some Progress here.
And it seems some of this has found its way into the French Senate as one Member talked about those "Elephants in China Shops".
Also, in what looks like a Confession Trump has admitted that America sent Weapons to Protestors in Iran in December and January. This confirms some sort of Complicity and that the 'Protest' was manufactured.
ReplyDeleteIn an obvious manipulation of cause and effect where Sanctions = economic Hardship = dissent = protest = predictable Iranian state response the Policy did no favours for Iranian People at all
Then the final part in the equation was the most cynical.
Put it this way, how would ANY Government respond if People took to it's Streets with Firearms in the name of Protest? Even the most liberal Democracy would employ an armed response as America itself has seen since the 1960's.
So, it's like this whole Crisis had been deliberately cultivated since Trump abandoned the JCPOA and Sanctions weren't just reapplied, they were increased more severely causing all of the above
Finally......a Ceasefire!
ReplyDeleteIn what looks like a huge Concession by 2 of the 3 Parties in the Conflict Iran and America have announced a 2 Week Ceasefire pending Talks brokered by Pakistan later this Week.
I say "2 of the 3" because Israel has very reluctantly accepted it while it has unfinished Objectives. Given the severe Consequences the War has had on civilian Life in the Region and the potential Catastrophe for the World the Israeli response to the Ceasefire should have been a lot more enthusiastic.
The Arrangement comes after Trump threatened that a Civilisation will end tonight (Tuesday) suggesting he would escalate American Attacks dramatically. How he would do this after the 4 and a half Week Assault remained to be seen but there were ominous Signals coming from America that the Doomsday Plane had been seen flying over the Nuclear War Command Center in Omaha, Nebraska. This is the Plane codenamed "Looking Glass" because it mirrors the entire Command and Control Facilities the President would need in a Nuclear War.
Would Trump have nuked Iran?
That would be a Question for him and his Sanity but this and his Comment looks like a very large Sabre being rattled. It also looks like a symptom of Desperation that conventional Strikes didn't seem to be working.
Trump himself might well have been removed from Office under the 25th Amendment if he had resorted to a Nuclear Option because of potential ramifications from other Nuclear Powers who could not have idly stood by if that had happened.
There is the possibility that his Decision was forced by the International Community which had increasingly criticised him and his War - with some usually compliant Allies showing signs of Dissent. Britain, France and others closing Airspace to American Strikes on Infrastructure, Criticism voiced in Legislatures and America facing the grave Risk of becoming a pariah State doesn't bode well for a Country that wants to be seen as the 'leader of the free World'.
A Situation made even more awkward if that community started gravitating towards Tehran and away from Washington.
It was refreshing to see that World did finally begin to isolate what was increasingly looking like a rogue State, which should hopefully see America abandon some of the Hubris it had developed in recent years. They might be the most powerful Country in the western Axis but they do still need the rest of the World.
At least the Ceasefire is progress and might cool things off a bit.
Iran's Conditions could be difficult for Trump to swallow, wanting Compensation for the illegal War, control over the Strait of Hormuz and American withdrawal amongst others. Some not unreasonable given they have been attacked twice in less than a year. They want a situation where that can't happen again, not one where everyone merely regroups for another War.
I hope Trump can find some better Negotiators than Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner too, as both look far too sympathetic, not to America, but to Israel which would be difficult for Iran to accept, while both have proved to be useless in Ukraine and Israel's duplicity in Gaza.
The reopening of Hormuz is a huge reprieve for a World that has seen it's Fuel and Fertiliser Supply severely curtailed. Ships that have been stranded in the Gulf can now leave with their Freight and others can enter and load up.
What it means for actual Supplies isn't clear but the Ceasefire caused a welcome drop in Oil Prices. It also means remedial Repairs could be done to damaged Infrastructure in the Region. Nothing.like what it might need in the long run which could take years, but it's a start.
What the Gulf States and Shipping Companies need to do now to take full advantage of the 2 Weeks is a full inventory of Ships stranded either in their Ports or the Gulf and what they can carry.
ReplyDeleteThese at least won't have to sail to or into the Gulf and hopefully some were loaded in the first Weeks of the Crisis.
As for those waiting outside the Gulf, whatever they were scheduled to transport could be arranged in readiness so loading time could be kept to a minimum. It means full cooperation between the Companies, the Ports and their Longshoremen Unions, but the sense of Urgency should help expedite that.
Then, the Ships could be turned around within the 2 Weeks
It means as much Goods can leave the Gulf as possible before the Ceasefire ends.