March 26, 2013 · 0 Comments
Iran is an example how interventionism kicks back.
Little history:
In 1951 the western powers, Great Britain and U.S., ousted the democratically elected prime minister Ali Razmara of Iran to enforce it’s interests to get control over it’s crude oil.
They installed the Shah, who was in power without democratic legitimization for years and was finally over turned by the radical Islamists in 1979.
Needless to say, that the new leaders learned from the way how the former prime minister was ousted and began to work possibly on a nuclear weapon to maintain it’s sovereignty.
The resulting political and armed opposition to all western allies in this context appears only logical. Same can be said to be true for North Korea.
Another indication of action-reaction relationship is the hastily modernization and expansion of the offensive strategic nuclear forces of Russia, which opposes the ongoing encirclement by NATO forces and will make sure to have the ability to overcome USA’s missile defense, and last but not least the dramatic increase in spending for China’s armed forces.
Now back to today’s politics:
As reported by Reuters, over the weekend, the U.S. Senate showed strong support for blocking Iran’s access to Euros, as Congress continues to push for additional measures to choke funding to Tehran’s nuclear program.
The Senate unanimously passed a non-binding amendment to the budget plan early on Saturday that seeks to stop Iran from using a loophole allowing it to use the European Central Bank’s interbank payment system to gain access to Euros.
On Monday, a State Department official in an interview with Reuters, expressed concern that the recent measures taken in the European Union are de facto loosening the sanctions regime against Iran.
The measure in question is January’s decision of Europe’s General Court which told EU governments to lift asset freezes against two Iranian banks that the European Union says are helping finance Tehran’s nuclear program.
Both the European Union and the United States view sanctions against the Iranian banking sector as a crucial component of economic pressure designed to force Tehran to scale back the nuclear work, which they suspect has covert military goals.
The story, on the one hand, reiterates old accusations against Iran. On the other hand, it reveals a relatively new layout in the whole system of anti-Iranian sanctions the U.S. is so elaborately trying to build with totally obedient assistance of its EU allies.
The “old news” part of the story is the one dealing with the Iranian nuclear program. Until now, no one has been able to prove its military character – if any, the evidence presented is no more reliable than that presented back in 2003 by Colin Powell to prove the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Still, the military character of Iranian nuclear program is taken for granted by the U.S. and its allies.
More so, the sanctions effectively target spheres totally unrelated to the notorious nuclear program. What has been affected is the pharmaceutical sector (thus makings things worse for the people rather than for the leadership of Iran), and especially the oil sector.
By exerting political pressure on Asian countries, by blocking transactions via European and transnational banks, by forcing EU insurance companies to stop insuring tankers carrying Iranian oil, the U.S. has already succeeded in drastically reducing oil imports from Iran by main buyers in Asia. For example, in India imports of Iranian oil dropped by 20 percent in 2012 as compared to 2011, and there is ground to believe that they will fall further in 2013.
In this context, the court ruling allegedly loosening sanctions is a strong irritant for the U.S. Therefore the nervous reaction and further pressure on EU allies is only natural.
But really, the Washington strategists have apparently failed to notice one aspect. That is, while exerting pressure on spheres outside the U.S. dollar domain they seem to have overstepped the limits – even in a world where they are sure to have no limits at all. It is true that the U.S. dollar is still the dominant reserve currency. But the very fact that Iran was compelled to turn to Euros is an important signal.
Other signals of the kind are sure to follow. And one may ask the Washington strategists, how they are planning to exert pressure for example, on China, when its Yuan becomes a real alternative for the empty paper presently printed en mass by the Federal Reserve.
Indeed, this attempt to block the Euro “loophole” looks like a forerunner of numerous other loopholes. And the stronger the U.S. is trying to press down on others (foes or allies – it does not really matter), the more numerous such future loopholes promise to be.
Boris Volkhonsky, senior research fellow, Russian Institute for Strategic Studies
In 1951, after the assassination of prime minister Ali Razmara, Dr. Mohammad Mosaddegh was elected prime minister by a parliamentary vote which was then ratified by the Shah. As prime minister, Mosaddegh became enormously popular in Iran after he nationalized Iran’s petroleum industry and oil reserves. In response, the British government, headed by Winston Churchill, embargoed Iranian oil and successfully enlisted the United States to join in a plot to depose the democratically elected government of Mosaddegh. In 1953 US President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized Operation Ajax. The operation, supported by the Shah, was successful, and Mosaddegh was arrested on 19 August 1953. The coup was the first time the US had openly overthrown an elected, civilian government of another sovereign state.[85]
After Operation Ajax, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi favoured American and British oil interests and his rule became increasingly autocratic. With American support, the Shah was able to rapidly modernize the Iranian infrastructure and military. However, his rule was also corrupt and repressive. Arbitrary arrests and torture by his secret police, SAVAK, were used to crush all forms of political opposition. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini became an active critic of the Shah’s White Revolution and publicly denounced the government.
Khomeini was arrested and imprisoned for 18 months. After his release in 1964, Khomeini publicly criticized the United States government. The Shah sent him into exile. He went first to Turkey, then to Iraq and finally to France. While in exile, Khomeini continued to denounce the Shah.
By the mid-1970s, there was growing unrest with the Shah’s repressive regime. The Iranian Revolution, also known as the Islamic Revolution,[86][87][88] began in January 1978 with the first major demonstrations against the Shah.[89] Minor political reforms and the release of some political prisoners in 1978 failed to satisfy the growing opposition. In November 1978, the Shah imposed martial law and implemented a new crackdown in an attempt to crush opposition. After strikes and demonstrations paralyzed the country and its economy, the Shah fled the country in January 1979 and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile to Tehran. His departure was tantamount to abdication. The Pahlavi dynasty collapsed ten days later, on 11 February, when Iran’s military declared itself “neutral”. Armed civilians and rebel troops overwhelmed troops loyal to the Shah in a climactic 3-days of street fighting. Iran officially became an Islamic Republic on 1 April 1979, when Iranians overwhelmingly approved a national referendum to make it so.[16][29] In parallel nation wide uprisings against the new regime erupted in Kordestan, Khuzestan, Balochistan and other areas, though were eventually subdued, with some lasting until late 1980.
By myfuamerica
Sorry, comments are closed on this post.