It felt like deja vu a few weeks ago when the Pentagon announced that Iran possessed a a ballistic missile with the means to destroy Eastern and Southern Europe. It certainly brings to mind another herald of doom made by the Defense Department a few years ago: Iraq’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction ring a bell?
It’s the same semantic, same strategic policy, same manipulation of primitive fears to destabilize citizens’ minds and opinions.
By pointing a malevolent finger at Iran, does the USA intend to target Iran next?
Let’s ask ourselves: has Iran? displayed any? “casus belli” intentions? Along with every country in the world, its objective is merely to grow economically and ensure the defense of its territory. Does nuclear power involve uniquely the development of weapons or can it also be perceived as a development of new sources of energy?
In what way Iran represents more of a danger than? Pakistan or China?? Both have acquired nuclear power recently – and if I recall well China is still communist and Pakistan is still religiously fundamentalist!
Why does the most powerful country see Iran as a potential threat to the equilibrium and the stability of the world?
Once again, the Pentagon has made a not-so-subtle attempt to rally Europeans behind so called concerns for “global” security – concerns which only thinly veil a purely national, imperialist objective. They failed to take into account that 1. geography isn’t a strong point for most Americans (60% can’t find Iraq on a world map) and 2. Europe has shown to be less trigger-happy in the past – or at least less prompt to wage wars. Staggering? miscalculation here!
As I glance on the Iranian file, I’m stricken by the obvious, its geographical position. Embedded between the Caspian sea, the Persian gulf, the Strait of Ormuz and the sea of Oman, it becomes a geo-strategic point of access to Caucasia, the Middle-East and Central Asia. Isn’t it the only route? uncontrolled by? the US??
Brief context on the US/British stakes in the game: during Iran’s fliration with democracy, Uncle Roosevelt and Uncle Churchill felt confident enough to invest. But when the Iranian government nationalized the oil companies, this spelled the end, potentially, to US and British investment in Iran. It concretely meant that Iranian lands could no longer be? exploited by anyone but the Iranian government.
Is it a coincidence that American and British interests are dominant in the region – the two countries now at the forefront of pressures placed on Iran to give up its weapons?
Fast forward to the present, where, in our global search for energy sources, natural gas is at the top of the list. And – surprise, surprise – Iran? counts among the leaders? in production and reserves of natural gas!?
This war game is getting old.