Iran shouldn’t be the enemy

January 25, 2012 2:21 pm0 commentsViews: 13

As the Obama administration moves from its predecessor’s mistakes, as well as its own, in its attitude towards the Middle East, it has fundamentally achieved instability in Western Asia. US Foreign Policy has left a gaping hole in the Gulf – Iran. Or has it? For the past decade, the media has led us to believe that the main enemy has been Al Qaeda & Co and that policy towards the Islamic Republic of Iran was precautionary.

This is aside from the obvious violent encounters in the US-Israel vs. Iran boxing ring, such as the US Spyplane that went down in December, the thrashing of the British embassy in Tehran or most recently the (evident) assassination of Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan. It does not all necessarily mean an explicit apocalyptic battle between West and East, but the world should prepare for a psychological onslaught between Iran and all those who oppose its dominion.

Essentially, a cold war on Iran has long been declared, and with news being leaked out that the European Union is planning to ban future purchases of Iranian oil, Iran will seep into an era of sanctions with the aim of crippling its economy. It is evident however; that hostility is only going to escalate. With the Arab Spring securing the potential of stable democratic governments debilitating Israel’s regional potency, the West must look towards other means of securing their allies hegemony. Whilst in reality, these sanctions may not prove as materialistically debilitating as the UN wishes it to be, the most it will do is rattle Iran’s already divisive regime.

However, this mere act of economic aggression by the USA recalls the boycotting of Russian goods throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Iran is still years away from creating nuclear warheads, and the proof is in the pudding, why else would Israel be continuously plotting to cleanse Iran of the nuclear scientists? Surely if they had nuclear weapons already it would be futile? Clearly, fear has been inculcated well amongst the policy makers in the Kibbutz. Moreover, I want to take this moment to point out that usage of weapons against Israel is highly unlikely, however the psychological advantage of having a nuclear deterrent is mightier than bloodshed, which we can analyse during the period that the US and USSR were at loggerheads with one another.

Another factor in addressing the animosity as an extension of the Cold War is due to Iran’s relative docility in foreign policy, it has not invaded a single country in the past two-hundred years and her own borders were violated by Iraq during its invasion in the 1980s. Britain itself has puppeteered Iranian politics by replacing and overthrowing governments for over a century. Iran has given no reason to invite such hostility. After all, fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers held Saudi Arabian passport, whilst Saudi Arabian soil did not feel the clump of a single American soldier’s footstep. Wikileaks aside, they haven’t been tarnished via the media to the extent Iran has either.

To take this point further, isn’t Iran military amassing itself an act of self-defence? After all, the US and Israel have invaded/attacked over ten countries since 2001, and due to the destabilisation of Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan, it would be unrealistic and brutally stupid for Iran not to develop its weaponry. I highly doubt either side wishes to start a war, however, these hostilities need to be further monitored and not be taken as a given by the media. Oxymoronically, before we start deciding who’s the enemy; our knee-jerk reaction should not be Iran.

Steffani Rodriguez

Views expressed in articles are the author’s and do not represent Comment Middle East