reflectiigeopolitice.ro

In an article titled “Talk of War against Iran – Our Country Is Not Outside the Campaign” in the pro-Hizbullah Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar, the daily’s editor, Ibrahim Al-Amin, discussed the possibility of an attack on Iran and the implications for Lebanon. He wrote that the U.S. position on Iran is not entirely clear and its moves do not necessarily herald an attack on Iran; nevertheless, America’s allies – Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and some European countries – urge it to take military action against Iran, seeing this as the only way to get it to change its policies, and the U.S. is certainly preparing the ground for this option. Al-Amin compared the current tension between the U.S. and Iran to the tension between Israel and Hizbullah: just as Israel wants to attack Hizbullah, but experts within it warn that an attack will be costly and will not necessarily produce a decisive result, the U.S. wants to weaken Iran and its allies, but knows that war against it will come at a price. The proponents of war on Iran, he says, do not realize that Iran is very powerful on the economic, political and military levels, and has a large arsenal that can threaten even Europe, as well as fighting capabilities that can topple states. Moreover, its many allies in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Palestine and elsewhere will come to its aid if it is attacked. He declared that, if a war breaks out, Hizbullah, as part of the resistance axis, will be a major part of it, and that the flames will reach Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other countries.

Bottom Line Up Front:

-Tensions have spiked between the U.S. and Iran recently, with both countries engaging in a series of tit-for-tat actions and heated rhetoric.
-But conflict should not be considered inevitable; containing Iran is possible and presents a favorable alternative to direct military conflict.
-Iran’s ‘playbook’ is based upon empowering the IRGC-QF to build armed factions into political movements with increasing influence and capabilities.
-The Trump administration largely views Iran through the lens of ‘supporting terrorism,’ which it does, but this frame is short-sighted and fails to appropriately capture the comprehensive nature of how Iran operates.

Opinion: Iran-backed Lebanese terror group might justify a military conflict with Israel – all in the name of serving Iranian interests – by claiming large gas reserves worth billions of dollars are being exploited by Israelis in Lebanese waters.

The question is: who will take the reins in Iran and make sure that the vast country does not morph into yet another "ungoverned territory" in the heart of the Middle East?

I think the question is designed to dodge the issue of confronting a rogue regime that has provoked the current crisis. Iran has an old and well-established bureaucracy, dating back to the 16th century, and capable of operating within a strong culture of governance. Despite the serious damage done to state structures by the mullahs and their acolytes, the reservoir of experience and talent available is vast enough to ensure governance even on autopilot.

The mullahs are playing with fire and, "He who plays with fire risks being burned!"

Targeting terrorists and their networks brings only temporary success—but the long-term strategy needs to focus on discrediting the ideologies that attract attackers.

It was a chilly January evening, and Khadija Abd and her family had just finished supper at their farm when the two men with guns burst into the room.