Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DoctorZIn

Iran and The American Allegations

July 25, 2004
Al-Hayat
Salameh Nematt

As long as more than 70 percent of the world's oil has an Islamic identity, or as along as more than 70 percent of the oil pipelines pass through Islamic territories, the antagonism between America and the Islamic states is expected to continue until it reaches a stage where one of them knows how to win the "heart and mind" of the other, or until one of them knows how to dominate the other.

In other words, the sole superpower in the world which is threatened by the rise of a united Europe, on the one hand, and by China, on the other, needs to control one of the most important elements of economic growth: energy and its prices. In this context, we can understand the reasons behind toppling both the regimes in Kabul and Baghdad. These are the same objectives behind Saddam's decision to invade Kuwait in the summer of 1990 before America intervened to frustrate his ambitious regional program.

When it was possible to militarily intervene in "rogue" states that might threaten world peace, as in the case of Afghanistan under Taliban's rule and Iraq under Saddam, and in order to guarantee America's leading role in the world, Washington needed more civilized means in order to thwart the united Europe and China's attempts to achieve what Saddam was seeking. Saddam sought to invade Kuwait in order to pave the way for subjugating Gulf oil-producing states under his policies and ambitions that went beyond the borders of the region.

Therefore, bolstering the American influence in the oil regions always required justifications and allegations such as those provided by Osama bin Laden in the events of 9/11. Saddam was also an excuse for America to enter the region in 1991. It could be said that America was in need of Saddam and bin Laden and perhaps it might have provided other allegations had the creative justifications of these two men were not present.

America and Britain had abandoned the Hashemite reign in Iraq because of its ambitions and its national enticement that went beyond its borders. It also abandoned the Shah in Iran because of his ambitions for dominating the oil region in order to promote his regional role and his international standing.

It is not permissible for small states to play the role of large ones, especially if the game is in a vital region such as the [Persian] Gulf. Whoever has power over this region can control the west's economy by controlling the oil prices, which affect the cost of production and consumption in major industrial countries. This is why Washington invested billions of dollars in launching its war in order to thwart any attempt to holdback the pulse of American economic life, regardless of who is seeking that role. This is also why the Europeans especially the French and the Germans opposed the American military intervention in Iraq. This is also why the Chinese were silent towards its confrontation across the Atlantic.

It is no secret that America refuses to impose taxes on the consumption of oil similar to what Europe is doing. America refused such taxes in order to keep the cost of its oil production low as opposed to the cost of the European production. This would give Washington an economic advantage that it would like to keep.

Iran's insistence today on promoting its influence in Iraq as opposed to the American influence and its perseverance concerning its nuclear program signifies that Tehran learned nothing from the lessons of the fall of the Mossadeq regime in 1953 and the Shah regime in 1979. The policies of dual containment were the bases for encouraging Iraq on launching its eight-year war supported by Washington in order to exhaust Iran and contain its regional ambitions. Because Tehran did not seem to have learned the lessons of the past and what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, Washington exposed this week Iran's involvement in the events of 9/11. History seems to be repeating itself.

http://english.daralhayat.com/OPED/07-2004/Article-20040725-f5b7c713-c0a8-01ed-0077-896f93507ac4/story.html


10 posted on 07/25/2004 8:55:17 AM PDT by DoctorZIn (Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DoctorZIn

Nothing bothers me more than when people compare the MI6/CIA overthrow of deeply popular Secularist Nationalist Dr. Mossadeqh in 1953 to trying to overthrow the dreaded ruthless dictators in Iran now.

What kind of ridiculous comparison is that ?


17 posted on 07/25/2004 10:30:12 AM PDT by freedom44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson