North Korea is already a nuclear power, and had not Israel and the United States attacked Iran, the latter was well on its way to acquiring ‘The Bomb’.
The delicate military action which the Western powers must implement is not a case of wiping Iran off the face of the Middle East, but simply doing enough damage to the existing radical leadership that it sparks a rebellion of the people against those militants.
Put bluntly, this must become a people’s revolution in Iran where democratic moderate Islam replaces the current extremist theology of the fundamentalist radicals.
Such fundamentalist Islamic radicals have a very warped interpretation of the Koran and even the most politically liberal person with any titter of wit would recognise that should they gain the capacity to make a nuclear weapon, it would most certainly be used against Israel.
In global terms, there are two facts people need to know about Israel. Firstly, it doesn’t give a hoot about world opinion. It will do whatever is necessary to destroy the terror group Hamas in Gaza, or the Hezbollah terror group in Lebanon.
Secondly, it is not afraid to indulge in a ‘first strike’ military option if it feels there is a threat to the survival of its existence. The current extremist Islamic leadership in Iran is one such regime which wants, like Hamas and Hezbollah, to see Israel eradicated as a nation.
Even since the Shab of Persia was overthrown in the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran has become a thorn in the flesh of Western powers and even many of its Middle East neighbours.
But the Western powers need to tread carefully in dealing with Iran militarily in case the Russians, Chinese and even the North Koreans see any Iran/Israel conflict as an opportunity to embarrass the United States.
Is it any wonder we witnessed some colourful language from US President Donald Trump when he clearly demonstrated his frustration with both states over their respective definitions of what is a ceasefire, a secession of violence - and more importantly, when it should start.
It seemed both Iran and Israel wanted to make the final point with one more missile before the actual supposed firing stopped.
Likewise, America does not want to rush into putting boots on the ground in Iran like it did in Vietnam and Afghanistan. In both wars, the United States left with its tail between its legs militarily, leaving the opponents in charge.
After American pulled out of Vietnam in the Seventies, the communists took over. In recent years, the Islamic radical Taliban is back in charge of Afghanistan. Even the old Soviet Union could not defeat the Taliban when it invaded the country a few decades ago.
The Donald is also walking a very high political and military tightrope. He must deploy enough military action against Iran to stop Israel using its nuclear weapons against Iran.
Likewise, he does not want the United States, or the West, to be drawn into a war of attrition on the ground in Iran. But The Donald must juggle both clubs - diplomacy and military - to ensure the current Islamic fundamentalist leadership in Iran either gives a cast iron guarantee it will never develop nuclear weapons, or is totally toppled in a new 1979-style revolution of the people.
With many European nations facing problems around immigration, including the UK and Ireland, there is the real danger that Iran could sneak terrorists into the British Isles to carry out attacks in both the UK and the Republic.
After all, during the Troubles, the Provisional IRA and the INLA carried out bombing campaigns in mainland Britain. And Southern Ireland need not wave the flag of so-called neutrality. The United States uses airports in the Republic to land its planes. In Iranian fundamentalist eyes, that makes Southern Ireland a so-called legitimate target.
Even Southern Ireland’s military reputation of providing United Nations peace keeping troops would not be enough to save it from a pro-Iranian Islamic terror attack. Southern Ireland is no stranger to such terrorist murder and mayhem given the 1974 no-warning bombs which the UVF detonated in Dublin and Monaghan during the Troubles.
So what is the solution to preventing the West from being dragged into a potential all-out war in the Middle East between Iran and Israel?
The US and the UK will have to deploy its elite respective special forces to eliminate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard leadership in the same way as Osama Bin Laden was hunted after 9/11.
At the same time, the US and UK must identify moderate Muslims who could transform Iran into a stable Western-style democracy with genuine human rights, especially for women.
The people who could compromise such a moderate leadership may currently be in jail in Iran, in hiding in Iran, or even in exile. Surely the entire population of Iran is not as extreme as the Revolutionary Guard leadership? There must be a sizeable number of moderate Muslims in Iran who could support a democratically run state.
Just as the UK became a haven for exiled governments during the Second World War, the UK and US need to politically also establish a moderate ‘government in waiting’ in exile when - not if - the current Revolutionary Guard leadership is finally and permanently deposed.
What is abundantly clear is that the West cannot allow a situation whereby the Revolutionary Guard is removed, only for it to return a few years later with even more savagery. The military mistakes of Vietnam and Afghanistan cannot be repeated with Iran.
 |
| Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter John is a Director for Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. |
And what about the war criminals fronting the Israeli regime? Where does your moral compass point in that regard?
ReplyDeleteFor the record, I too would like to see Isreal as a nation eradicated. Justice for Palestine.
Can I ask you, Henry Joy, how Israel is to be eradicated as a nation as opposed to the removal of its current far right government by a democratic election?
DeleteRegime change in Iran should be effected internally through popular revolution backed be external soft power, we have learned that external military interventions to achieve that goal does not work. The legacy of the overthrow of Mossadiq in 1953 looms large.
DeleteHow it comes about, Barry is way beyond my pay grade. But my core belief in natural justice dictates that a state inhabited by citizens of equal status needs to emerge.
Delete'In August 1953, Mosaddegh was ousted in the coup, only 2 years after he had nationalised the Iranian oil industry. The Anglo-Iranian Oil Company—presently known as British Petroleum or BP—had controlled Iranian oil until then, and so, Mossadegh’s move was aimed at countering foreign control. As had been planned by the CIA-MI6, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi seized power, reinstalling the monarchy in Iran.....
Delete.....About the 1953 coup, Kumar explained: “The major interest was to check the evolving socialist character of the state under Mossadegh, keeping the Western monopoly over the oil supply chain. The intervention was also motivated by Cold War geopolitics.”
The ‘Red Scare’ was strong in the US from 1947 to 1957. Kermit Roosevelt, Chief of the Near East and Africa Division, CIA, tried to convince the Shah of Iran II about the coup plan, saying the “failure to act could lead only to a Communist Iran or to a second Korea”, CIA documents revealed.
Israel-US are now guided by similar factors—”Iran’s nuclear programme, its ‘axis of resistance’ network, increasing regional influence, and its opposition to Western hegemony”—Kumar said, adding that Western forces, however, created their argument in favour of ‘democracy’ and removing an ‘undemocratic’ government.
Moreover, America’s open support for Israel’s war against Iran is similar to its support in the 1950s for an operation initially ideated by the UK, Kumar further said.'
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/iran-s-encounter-with-regime-change-in-1953-how-the-board-is-set-this-time-around/ar-AA1HeEHb
Henry Joy, I agree that a state based on equality needs to emerge but how? Would the annexation of the West Bank by Israel and the granting of it's Palestinian resident s Israeli citizenship be one route? Not one I advocate. I still advocate for the two state solution.
DeleteThe how is always the most difficult hill to scale. The ethics suggest it should happen; the realpolitik suggests it won't. Realpolitik is invariably more powerful than ethics. Stalin sort of summed it up when he asked how many divisions does the Pope have.
DeleteThe Book Of Revelation has much to say about Israel & it's environs during end times .
ReplyDeleteWhich is why Netananyu has such support from evangelical dispensational Christians or Christian Zionists who are actually antisemitic.
ReplyDeleteIran is sandwiched between two nuclear armed powers: Israel and Pakistan. It also has a distant nuclear power to contend with, the United States. It has been the subject of foreign orchestrated coups, and it has fought protracted conventional wars in Iraq. Why wouldn’t Iran want a nuclear deterrent?
ReplyDeleteThe quest for a nuclear reactor has always been a nationalist objective for Iran since the Shah's era. Nuclear proliferation is always to be avoided.
DeleteTo avoid nuclear proliferation, you have to address Iran’s legitimate security concerns. At present, Israel and the United States can strike at any time for any reason, and there’s little Iran can do about it. Would that be the case if Iran possessed nuclear weapons? Or would Israel and the United States need to tread carefully? I think the answer is obvious, and it’s central to the logic of Tehran’s strategic calculus. Latent and overt threats, calls for regime change, military strikes, and the like don’t dissuade Iran so much as encourage it to go nuclear.
Delete