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.
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"!
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.
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.