Liberate US Or Iran First…

The United States (US) wants to liberate Iran and supports the Iranian people’s struggle for human rights, democracy, and freedom. Historically, Iranian history is filled with foreign powers meddling in its affairs for their own gain.

The latest, on 28^th February, Israel and US launched brutal joint airstrikes on Iran which killed the supreme leader and started a war with the goal of regime change. There was a shifting litany of justifications for launching the war; to ward off an imminent Iranian threat, to destroy Iran’s missile and military capabilities, to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon, to secure its natural resources and to achieve regime change.

The United Nations condemned the strikes as it is a violation of Iran’s sovereignty under international law. It violates the UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force, do not meet the criteria for self-defence and lack authorisation from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).

It happened while serious negotiations were in progress in Oman. On 27^th February, Oman’s Foreign Minister said, a “breakthrough” had been reached and Iran had agreed both to never stockpile enriched uranium and to full verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Trump had said Iran should come to an agreement “very quickly” and warned failure to reach a deal would be “very traumatic”. He wanted them to be more reasonable and responsible and blamed Ali Khamenei, whose refusal to stop the nuclear weapons programme that led to another regional war. The following day he said the Iranian leader had “apologised and surrendered because of the relentless US and Israeli attack” but added later in his Truth Social post, “today Iran will be hit very hard!” On 6^th March, he said there would be “no deal” unless it agreed to an unconditional surrender.

Iran rejected claims that it intended to attack the US, citing the aggressive posture of the US armed forces as evidence. On 23^rd January, Trump announced that a US “armada” was heading to the Middle East, including the USS Abraham Lincoln.

The Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that there is no proof Iran is building an atomic bomb. UNSC concerns were solved by the creation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015 but US withdrew in 2018 and re-imposed sanctions with new ones added and use of force rather than diplomacy.

American intelligence reports suggested that alleged threats of long-range Iranian ballistic missiles were unfounded, with such capabilities requiring up until 2035 should Iran have decided to pursue. Separately, lawmakers have called for the administration to provide evidence that Iran posed a threat.

Trump had painted Ali Khamenei as one of the evillest people in history, ruled with an iron fist and blocking attempts at moderate reforms and encouraged Iranians to take over their government. The norm in western mainstream media is to portray Middle Eastern leaders who does not toe the line with their interests, with a narrative of tyranny. The double standard is seen while Khamenei is vilified when other leaders with worse human rights records receive different treatment based on their alignment.

The current war could soon run out of munitions and the economic toll could reach $210 billion on the US.

The other problem, and US never learned from is, ‘breaking all the china’ will involve more factions and belligerents from the region. Further, the vacuum left may be filled by breakaway groups or other fanatical factions.

A CBS survey found that 62% of Americans believe the administration failed to fully explain the military goals in Iran and the absence of an endgame had raised alarm.

Are we are seeing a repeat of 2003, when the Bush government lied not only to the Americans but also the whole world, in order to justify an illegal war against Iraq? The Iraqi government fell in 21 days but US spent US$2 trillion and 4,488 Americans were packed in body bags.

Trump described the attacks as “a massive and ongoing operation to prevent this very wicked, radical dictatorship from threatening America and to defend the Americans by eliminating imminent threats”. Despite the threats, both sides were in serious negotiations when the brutal air operation struck.

Has Iran collapsed? A collapsed state does not stay empty of leadership. Political scientists have long observed that countries are held together not by ideology but by organized coercion. Do we see that in the US?

This once the “Paris of the Middle East” may not be easy meat. Can US ensure a clean democracy if and only if it wins this war? How about the brand of democracy in US itself?

Is blood the sole language of politics?

In the last 15 years, US has engaged in direct military actions in at least 10-15 countries. The lesson is that military actions created the precise conditions for political catastrophe. In Iraq and in Libya, Obama helped bring about regime change in 2011, but political instability has endured since. Is it for regional stability? If so, why has every round of intervention or strikes produced a wider regional war?

Why must a sovereign government receive Washington’s approval? Operation Absolute Resolve, another violation of international law, saw US bombed Venezuela and abducted its President. US framed the operation as a transnational anti-narcotics campaign?

As usual, Washington may have a preference but does not have a sincere plan as seen in all the countries that it has attacked.

So, who is really very wicked and radical? Is the US being reasonable and acted responsibly by the attacks? Is this reflective of the struggle for human rights, democracy, and freedom?  Who then is the evillest and govern with an iron fist? Can we carry on tolerating this because if we do, what will the future generations say about us?

Operation Epic Fury has turned out to be a disaster of epic proportions since somebody has proven that the furies of a country with the most powerful, lethal and advanced fighting force the world has ever seen can be tamed. Geopolitically, Gulf states should start asking can US guarantee the long-term security of the region.

The long-overdue promise to end the war in Ukraine or relieving the sufferings in Gaza were just lip-service since US has started another war. The chaotic policies, without proper checks and balances do not have regard for both domestic and international laws. Is the US returning ‘to the law of the jungle’? Its president was longing for the Nobel Peace Prize, arguing he deserves it more than anyone for mediating international conflicts.

Perhaps, if world leaders start wearing Florsheim brand shoes, the US may be more reasonable and will act more responsibly without branding them as evil, wicked or radical dictators.

By the way, what’s the latest on the Epstein files?

As for the countries that condemned Iran’s retaliations, were there any valid legal justifications on the brutal US and Israeli strikes and is this not terrorism?

What say you…

 

Saleh Mohammed