Ominous signs in Iran under siege

[unhappycamper]

Ominous signs in Iran under siege
By Kaveh L Afrasiab
Oct 2, 2010

Iran is increasingly under siege. From cyber-attacks on its nuclear infrastructure to biting economic and financial sanctions, to overt support for (armed) opposition groups, to a military build-up of neighbors, it appears that outside powers are making a concerted effort at regime change in the Islamic Republic.

If unchecked, this will likely yield growing regional tensions instead of dialogue that reduces them. For all practical purposes, United States President Barack Obama's "Iran engagement" policy has turned into a subversive engagement with pro-democracy and opposition groups, tantamount to a new level of interference in Iran's internal affairs under the veneer of democracy and human rights.

By all accounts, in the aftermath of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad's controversial speech at the United Nations last week eliciting harsh Western responses, the prospects for dialogue appear to have diminished, replaced by a new, and ominous, qualitative turn for the worse in the tumultuous US-Iran relations. This in addition to the new "human rights sanctions" imposed by the US government on a number of Iranian officials, as well as the new drumbeats of war by various US pundits. (See New Iran sanctions as war chorus rises Asia Times Online, October 1, 2010.)

Adding new teeth to the harsh jaws of Iran sanctions, the US government has just announced that four major oil companies are quitting Iran, which, if true, represents a major blow to the ailing energy sector. It has been forced to shut down several major projects, such as in Assaluyeh, which is bound to reverberate throughout the oil-based economy in the near future. United States Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said on Thursday that Royal Dutch Shell, based in Britain and the Netherlands; France's Total; Eni of Italy; and the Norway-based Statoil had committed to no further investments in Iran.

Coinciding with Tehran's announcement of a new delay in launching the Bushehr power plant, widely attributed to the cyber-attack that Tehran say originate from the US and or Israel, these represent serious setbacks for Iran that the country can ill-afford.

[hobbit709]

1. Going by history, TPTB are trying to provoke Iran into doing something

they can use as an excuse to attack the country for.

[Xipe Totec]

2. Ahmadinejad's tinfoil hattery is not helping nt

[hobbit709]

3. The hardliners stay in power because we keep threatening them.

As long as there is a perceived or real threat from the outside, the hardliners can use that to their advantage. And Iran has long memories of our meddling there.

[TheMadMonk]

7. Same tinhattery as Saddam's final months of defiance. If he blinks he's dead.

If he abandon's nuclear independence he will be torn apart at home. And he hands the US a divided Iran to play games with.

His only slight chance is to hold the hard line and hope he can stall long enough for the US to keep weakening itself over Iraq and Afghanistan and have an intact Iran to defend itself against that weakened US.

[KharmaTrain]

4. They'll Never Learn...

The only people truly capable of "regime change" in Iran are the people themselves. That's who outsted the Shah and the CIA in '79 and are Armadeenjahd's biggest threat and fear. Our "liberation" of Iraq sure worked well, didn't it? And how's that nation building going on in Afghanistan? It's the wet dream of the neo-cons who think of the world as big Risk game board and their military-industrial complex cronies who profit every step of the way.

[Skidmore]

6. Yes, and I think they are banking on Iranians to step up.

I think they will eventually.

[HughMoran]

8. Exactly

What's wrong with this approach? Better than dropping bombs from the git go.

[Skidmore]

10. I don't have a problem with this necessarily.

I know the Iranian people and they will fight to the last man in the face of a threat. It is better they bring about their own change in leadership, but will not do so as long as they feel disrespected by outsiders. Westerners never truly understand the concept of "ab-e ru (face/honor) that exists in the ME. Honor is some sort of cypher to us anymore and we are noted for a lack of a such a code anymore. We always underestimate them and never have learned how to befriend them.

[KharmaTrain]

5. They'll Never Learn...

The only people truly capable of "regime change" in Iran are the people themselves. That's who outsted the Shah and the CIA in '79 and are Armadeenjahd's biggest threat and fear. Our "liberation" of Iraq sure worked well, didn't it? And how's that nation building going on in Afghanistan? It's the wet dream of the neo-cons who think of the world as big Risk game board and their military-industrial complex cronies who profit every step of the way.

[marmar]

11. Exactly.

[pampango]

9. "subversive engagement with pro-democracy ... groups"?

Unless "pro-democracy groups" is code for something else, what's wrong with that? Is the author suggesting that no one should support pro-democracy forces in places with undemocratic governments? There are "pro-democracy groups" in Iran as was obvious during and after their last national election.

In the good ol' days, I thought that sanctions and support for democratic opposition forces in places like South Africa was the progressive alternative to military force or ignoring a continuting injustice. The combination of tactics worked over time in South Africa and should be considered a success for progressives not a failure.

While "subversive engagement with pro-democracy and opposition groups" may adhere to a "veneer of democracy and human rights", I'm not sure that countries like China that support Ahmadinejad's regime are doing so to promote democracy and human rights, either.

[marmar]

12. Some lessons will apparently never be learned.

nt