Should US not clear mess in Afghanistan before taking on Iran
Political and Military leadership in ME (Middle East) and SE asia(South East Asia have been watching fast moving situation in the region. Since the 1980s, the American political leadership has generally seen aggression, occupation of other lands, installation of puppet regimes through invasions, and plunder of other people's natural resources as "America's pre-ordained destiny". Reagan was not the first to articulate this, but he was certainly one of the most influential American presidents to leave behind a doctrine of aggression which continues to dominate American foreign policy.
In August 1980, addressing the Veterans of Foreign Wars Convention at Chicago, he broadly outlined this doctrine and called it America's pre-ordained destiny. It must have been a right-wing ideologue who wrote the speech – for the sophistication of language and ideas in this speech are far beyond Reagan. No matter, whoever was the brain behind the speech, there could not have been a more lucid articulation of what America was to do in the decades that followed.
Reagan criticised the Carter administration for its perceived failure to "see any threatening pattern in the Soviet presence, by way of Cuban proxies, in so much of Africa, which is the source of minerals absolutely essential to the industrialised democracies of Japan, Western Europe, and the US. We are self-sufficient in only five of the 27 minerals important to us industrially and strategically, and so the security of our resource lifeline is essential." He saved his punch lines for the closing of the speech: "But let's do a better job of exporting Americanism…I believe it is our preordained destiny to show all mankind that they, too, can be free without having to leave their native shore."
Let us note that Reagan's speech about America's preordained destiny was delivered approximately four months after "Operation Eagle Claw", the military operation of April 24, 1980, to rescue 52 Americans kept hostage by students in the American Embassy in Tehran. The failed mission, resulting in the destruction of two aircrafts and the death of eight American servicemen and one Iranian civilian, was to produce an Iran syndrome in American psyche, which continues to haunt it even today. The hostages were released on January 19, 1981, just minutes after the Ronald Reagan was sworn in, following the signing of the "Algiers Accords" in Algeria.
Yet, it was not just the 44 hostages; it was the sudden loss of the largest CIA operational base in Asia that was a blow to America's perceived preordained destiny. The long-standing support of the Shah of Iran, who was restored to power in a 1953 coup organised by the CIA at the American Embassy against a democratically elected nationalist Iranian government, had produced a wonderful base for the CIA's operations for the entire Gulf region.
With that base gone, America had to invest billions of dollars in smaller countries (Oman, other Gulf states, and finally Afghanistan). Yet, it never forgot Iran.
In time, America's efforts to find excuses to somehow destabilise Iran have become more complex and bizarre. Yet, no one would have imagined that American sensationalism will hit such a low level that its Iran phobic good guys will produce a script on which one cannot even cry, let alone laugh.
This time around, it is the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), which, according to no less than the Attorney General of the United States of America Eric Holder, has uncovered "a deadly plot directed by factions of the Iranian government to assassinate a foreign ambassador on US soil with explosives." Holder must have forgotten the meaning of his last name when he added that the bombing of the Saudi embassy in Washington was also part of the plan.
Subsequent spinning amplified the plot to include the bombing of the Israeli embassy in Washington, as well as the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires. Holder sold the shoddy plot to the eager media as "a $1.5m murder-for-hire" plan. A man named Arbabsiar was arrested at JFK airport in New York. He allegedly confessed, according to the Justice Department.
Had it been left at that lower level, perhaps there would have been some hope that better sense prevailed, but Obama, suffering from his lowest approval rating, got on the bombast immediately and warned Iran that it will face the toughest possible sanctions for the alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington on US soil.
He threatened that the US would not take any options off the table in dealing with Iran, which is normally understood as a diplomatic code for the possibility of military action. "This is part of a pattern of dangerous and reckless behaviour by the Iranian government," Mr Obama said, yet, it is exactly the reckless behaviour of the US administration: it concocts plots, supports them with flimsy evidence, goes all the way to the maid called the Security Council, gets some resolutions passed and gets its war machinery in action.
This time around, however, it is just a big joke, based on a poor script that no one has bought. "We do not need to do that," the Iranian president brushed aside the allegations, "there is no reason to." Indeed, there is no reason to take out one individual from the huge Saudi clan which rules the oil rich country. Yet, there must be a reason for this sudden hype.
I wonder if there is a connection between this poorly staged drama and the 60 billion dollar arms sale agreement that the United States has signed with the Saudis. Could this drama be a way to remove some hurdle in that sale which flashed in the news media and then immediately disappeared?
The details of this biggest-ever arms sale have never been made public, but it was said that the Israelis have not objected to it and the possible target of the Saudi arms stockpile is Iran. So, is Iran the next stop in America's preordained destiny?
In August 1980, addressing the Veterans of Foreign Wars Convention at Chicago, he broadly outlined this doctrine and called it America's pre-ordained destiny. It must have been a right-wing ideologue who wrote the speech – for the sophistication of language and ideas in this speech are far beyond Reagan. No matter, whoever was the brain behind the speech, there could not have been a more lucid articulation of what America was to do in the decades that followed.
Reagan criticised the Carter administration for its perceived failure to "see any threatening pattern in the Soviet presence, by way of Cuban proxies, in so much of Africa, which is the source of minerals absolutely essential to the industrialised democracies of Japan, Western Europe, and the US. We are self-sufficient in only five of the 27 minerals important to us industrially and strategically, and so the security of our resource lifeline is essential." He saved his punch lines for the closing of the speech: "But let's do a better job of exporting Americanism…I believe it is our preordained destiny to show all mankind that they, too, can be free without having to leave their native shore."
Let us note that Reagan's speech about America's preordained destiny was delivered approximately four months after "Operation Eagle Claw", the military operation of April 24, 1980, to rescue 52 Americans kept hostage by students in the American Embassy in Tehran. The failed mission, resulting in the destruction of two aircrafts and the death of eight American servicemen and one Iranian civilian, was to produce an Iran syndrome in American psyche, which continues to haunt it even today. The hostages were released on January 19, 1981, just minutes after the Ronald Reagan was sworn in, following the signing of the "Algiers Accords" in Algeria.
Yet, it was not just the 44 hostages; it was the sudden loss of the largest CIA operational base in Asia that was a blow to America's perceived preordained destiny. The long-standing support of the Shah of Iran, who was restored to power in a 1953 coup organised by the CIA at the American Embassy against a democratically elected nationalist Iranian government, had produced a wonderful base for the CIA's operations for the entire Gulf region.
With that base gone, America had to invest billions of dollars in smaller countries (Oman, other Gulf states, and finally Afghanistan). Yet, it never forgot Iran.
In time, America's efforts to find excuses to somehow destabilise Iran have become more complex and bizarre. Yet, no one would have imagined that American sensationalism will hit such a low level that its Iran phobic good guys will produce a script on which one cannot even cry, let alone laugh.
This time around, it is the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), which, according to no less than the Attorney General of the United States of America Eric Holder, has uncovered "a deadly plot directed by factions of the Iranian government to assassinate a foreign ambassador on US soil with explosives." Holder must have forgotten the meaning of his last name when he added that the bombing of the Saudi embassy in Washington was also part of the plan.
Subsequent spinning amplified the plot to include the bombing of the Israeli embassy in Washington, as well as the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires. Holder sold the shoddy plot to the eager media as "a $1.5m murder-for-hire" plan. A man named Arbabsiar was arrested at JFK airport in New York. He allegedly confessed, according to the Justice Department.
Had it been left at that lower level, perhaps there would have been some hope that better sense prevailed, but Obama, suffering from his lowest approval rating, got on the bombast immediately and warned Iran that it will face the toughest possible sanctions for the alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington on US soil.
He threatened that the US would not take any options off the table in dealing with Iran, which is normally understood as a diplomatic code for the possibility of military action. "This is part of a pattern of dangerous and reckless behaviour by the Iranian government," Mr Obama said, yet, it is exactly the reckless behaviour of the US administration: it concocts plots, supports them with flimsy evidence, goes all the way to the maid called the Security Council, gets some resolutions passed and gets its war machinery in action.
This time around, however, it is just a big joke, based on a poor script that no one has bought. "We do not need to do that," the Iranian president brushed aside the allegations, "there is no reason to." Indeed, there is no reason to take out one individual from the huge Saudi clan which rules the oil rich country. Yet, there must be a reason for this sudden hype.
I wonder if there is a connection between this poorly staged drama and the 60 billion dollar arms sale agreement that the United States has signed with the Saudis. Could this drama be a way to remove some hurdle in that sale which flashed in the news media and then immediately disappeared?
The details of this biggest-ever arms sale have never been made public, but it was said that the Israelis have not objected to it and the possible target of the Saudi arms stockpile is Iran. So, is Iran the next stop in America's preordained destiny?
