Welcome to WARN, Key Reasons Why Iran Might Become Next Target
for US missile.
Trump's recent missile attack on Syria and his further threats against North Korea have
surprised many political analysts who had predicted a slightly more peaceful start to
his term in office.
Russian economist and blogger Ivan Danilov warns against underestimating Trump's decisiveness
and provides reasons why Iran might be his next target.
The US' military and industrial complex, he writes, is so crucial to its economy and has
in its possession so many serious political resources, that all attempts to avoid drawing
the US into a war can only delay it but not ultimately prevent it.
There is a political saying which goes that every American president should wage his own
war, the blogger says.
But this is not a reflection of the bloodlines of its political leaders but rather a sober
assertion that there is a constant need to find a sacrifice for the almighty military-industrial
lobby.
Trump, the president who does not enjoy the support of the American political elite, desperately
needs the support of this a powerful political force.
The US economy however is unable to sustain a truly large-scale conflict, especially if
it causes any serious damage to the global economy.
This will entail further losses to the international technological and logistical chains, which
are of key importance to the stable operation of US corporations, the economist says.
This greatly limits the range of targets for US aggression.
However the Trump administration is also facing two more issues: first, it should demonstrate
strength where Obama demonstrated weakness.
Second, the average American has become weary of military conflicts.
Trump capitalized on this last point in his election campaign, by promising not to get
involved in any senseless wars on foreign soils.
This explains the hesitancy of the Trump administration to get more actively involved into the Syrian
and North Korean conflicts.
Apart from PR and a sporadic demonstration of power, any risk of a direct military confrontation
with Russia on Syrian territory or of a nuclear incident and a regional war on the Korean
peninsula are unacceptable to the White House, Danilov says, at least for now.
In terms of North Korea, the situation is complicated by signals from the US' allies
in the region, Seoul and Tokyo, that they are not interested in a US military intervention
scenario.
Any reckless ventures in Syria or North Korea will bring more damage than benefits to the
administration.
However, the blogger says, in the case of Iran, the risk/reward ratio is totally different.
In terms of his PR, Trump might play the Iranian card to demonstrate that he is able to reach
success through the use of force where the Obama administration made 'unjustified' concessions
to Tehran.
In this way, Trump will also deliver on one of his electoral promises to toughly confront
Iran and cancel the nuclear deal.
While he fails to deliver on other electoral pledges, confrontation with Iran might became
a way to safe his image of the politician who delivers on his promise.
A military operation against such a large regional player as Iran would require considerable
investments of power and money and will justify almost any increase in military expenditure.
The military-industrial lobby will support this scenario in every possible way, the economist
says.
For a number of historic, ideological, political and economic reasons, Saudi Arabia and Israel,
the US' key partners in the Middle East, are likely to provide complete support of a military
strike on Iran.
These two countries have a certain influence on the American internal political processes.
According to US media, the Iranian issue is set to top the agenda of Trump's upcoming
negotiations in Riyadh and Tel Aviv.
It is not without reason that Trump is being called the "president of oil producers."
He has already taken certain measures to support US oil companies, including the appointment
of ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson as his secretary of state.
he President has also unraveled Obama's environmental restrictions, which is also in favor of the
oil sector, however it pales into comparison with the stream of petrodollars which would
pour onto the American oil producers in case of a real war in the Persian Gulf.
While the escalation of geopolitical tensions around Iran might cause an increase in energy
prices, a full-fledged military operation is guaranteed to see an oil price spike.
China will be then left without its major supplier of energy resources, which will come
as an additional bonus to the US, Danilov says.
Another strategic purpose the US might achieve in the region with the help of Iran might
be to create a situation of "controlled chaos."
The collapse of the Iranian authorities will create the ideal conditions for the spread
of various radical groups.
The elimination of an Iranian deterrent will have an impact on stability of the neighboring
states and will pose a threat to Russia in the Caucasus.
Besides, the elimination of the viable Iranian authorities will have a negative impact on
China's major geopolitical project, namely its so-called "Silk Road" project, where Iran
is playing not an insignificant role.
Hence the strike on Iran can be quite a rational solution to the task of deterring China and
exerting pressure on Russia, the blogger concludes.
Among the drawbacks of direct military confrontation with Iran, he further reasons, is the risk
of being targeted by Russia's anti-missile defense systems which have been supplied to
Iran.
Besides, the US' European allies seem to be reluctant to abandon the results of Obama's
nuclear deal which opened Iranian natural resources and the Iranian market to the European
companies.
It is yet to be seen whether these risks can prevent the escalation of the conflict between
Washington and Tehran.
What we are currently witnessing, Danilov says, is an evident diplomatic preparation
towards the cancellation of the agreement with Iran.
Trump has recently claimed that Iran "is not living up to the spirit" of the nuclear deal,
while Tillerson has said that Tehran is complying with the deal but "continues sponsoring terrorism."
Danilov finally reviews Russia's possible role in the potential Iranian-American conflict.
He calls it "unviable" to enter the war for Iran.
Nor it is to support a possible operation of the US.
The ideal variant would be to provide a diplomatic solution to the Iranian-American problem with
the support of China and the EU, however it is too early to speculate on this, he said.
First, it is necessary to wait what plans and ideas Trump will bring back from his Middle
Eastern trip, the blogger concluded.
For more infomation >> Make An Intro For Your YouTube Video (5 Ways!) - Duration: 5:24. 
For more infomation >> NBC 7 News: Military Vets Graduate from Manufacturing Training Center Workshops for Warriors - Duration: 1:11. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét