.
There has been repeated bombing threats from the West, not the other way around. The Western backing to Saddam’s horrible war on Iran. There’s been killing of Iran’s scientists, sanctions, humiliating words and demands.
Why Iran in focus and not all those who have nuclear weapons? Why 5 nuclear weapons states at the table, all violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty – telling Iran not to have what they have?
Why focus on Iran, not Israel which has nuclear weapons, much higher relative military expenditures, a record of violence?
The little word “why” that signifies the tremendous a-symmetry that has never ever been allowed to surface in the Western biased media coverage of Iran: the bad and the treacherous and only that.
I mean, did you see TV documentaries about Iran recently – its history, civilisation, culture, modern art, films or the life of the people?
Did you get a reasonably balanced account of the US/Western influence there since 1953? A fair assessment of Iran’s light and dark sides – or did you get only the latter through Western eyes such as its human rights problems, the religious elite and the dress code for women in public spaces?
Most of the answers can be found in the fact that it was all a manufactured crisis – as has been shown by TFF Associate and world renown investigative analyst, Gareth Porter.
Totally unnecessary, in other words. And that explains why Israel’s prime minister’s sounds so shrill these days.
Problems ahead
1. The Saudi-Arabia/Israel/Sunni/IS/Golf Cooperation Council emerging alliance sharing an interest – against virtually the rest of the world – in sabotageing this deal. Problematic indeed for Washington’s future navigation.
2. The emerging 100.000 new Saudi-led and bankrolled regional army with one likely target, Iran.
3. A possible Israeli attack on Iran – not in the interest of its citizens but to self-fulfil the paranoid prophecy of PM Netanyauhu who since 1992 has predicted Iran would be a nuclear power and today talks about it being a threat to the world, striving for world dominance and calls the deal a surrender.
4. A “No” to the deal in the U.S. Congress.
5. Problems of interpretation of the deal’s fine print when it comes to implementing its provisions on the ground in Iran.
6. Lack in the EU/NATO/US of anything that can be called a vision for the next 20-50 years for – and together with – the Middle East. And in the absence of that, a fall-back to warfare as an option. Be sure of one thing: Today’s deal will reshape much of the Middle East – hopefully for the better.
Vision of Iran in the future
Undoubtedly frightening to some, Iran can – and should – now achieve its rightful position in the region and the world.
Permit me to share one vision that I hold dear for the future:
Iran as a Switzerland of the Middle East – different in a number of ways, like Switzerland, and peace-oriented; a meeting place for people and countries all over the world, a country with experts educated, sooner or later, as peace researchers, mediators and reconciliators.
It is an Iran that, if embarking on it, may assist others with its professionalism and inspire them with a peace vision – and which can provide wonderful nature good for meetings outside the spotlights of the media and a country that, relieved of the external pressures and harassment, can slowly but surely liberalize and thus utilise its tremendous human and cultural potentials.
This would be greatly facilitated through a new orientation in Israel, confidence-building and eventually peace and trust between Palestine and Israel.
It would also become more realistic with the implementation of the UN-declared goal of a Middle East free from nuclear weapons. Israel has no reason to keep its nukes when today’s deal has been implemented.
Instead of walking out from the – unfair and a-symmetric situation – Iran has shown the way: non-violent struggle called dialogue instead of violence.
And for that we should all be grateful and hopeful.
