End the Lie

Why does the West seem to be ignoring Russia and China in their approach to Iran?

Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size Text Size Print This Page

By End the Lie

If nothing else is clear, it is this: the West and allied nations are ready for war. It may be a continued covert assault (as highlighted by statements from the Israeli Vice Prime Minister regarding continued support of terrorists inside Iran along with previous incidents) or a more overt, traditional conflict as shown by the troop buildups in the region which I have also been thoroughly documenting in my “Iran: a quickly evolving geopolitical imbroglio” series.

All of this is in complete opposition to statements repeatedly made by both China and Russia.

Here I have to note that Russia and China are not weak nations and they cannot be ignored in our analysis of this situation, especially when it comes to considering what they might do in response to Western aggression.

We must also keep in mind; it is not just the United States and Israel which would participate in an all-out strike on Iran.

Indeed, as the Voice of Russia pointed out today, the United States, Britain and France have all begun to dispatch troops to the Persian Gulf, writing, “in a move which experts say suggests preparations for a war with Iran. The first strikes could be carried out at the beginning of the summer, media reports say.”

This timeline is possible, although I am not the type to make predictions when it comes to timing of events like this, because chances are I’ll be wrong.

A strike could be in five minutes or five years, it is really impossible to tell as evidenced by analysts making what they thought were iron clad and accurate predictions for years about an imminent strike on Iran.

I think this chronic inaccuracy and premature date-setting could be happening for two reasons:

1) Humans are far from perfect and mistakes can be made, especially when it comes to highly complex and mysterious geopolitical maneuverings. Reporters and analysts can be easily swayed by statements from high ranking officials (an example of a fallacious appeal to authority) who might just be speculating or leading said analysts and reporters to publish misleading information.

2) There is a psychological operation being conducted, aimed at making people (especially in the West) believe that an attack on Iran is inevitable and imminent, thus preparing them for such a situation and making them think that it should happen, or that there is nothing for them to do to stop it from happening.

Or, there is always the very real possibility that it is a combination of the two or, of course, something other motivation entirely, which I am not yet aware of.

Either way, it seems to be the case that the West is completely ignoring the opposition to their anti-Iranian crusade.

They seem to believe that Iran has lost all her allies and is thus stranded and defensively crippled to some extent.

The Voice of Russia states that some reports indicate that the current quite sizable American naval presence in the Gulf is going to be even further bolstered by the destroyer Momsen and the Annapolis, a nuclear submarine, along with another aircraft carrier strike group.

They also correctly highlight the troop buildup in the region, along with British forces and those from the United Arab Emirates reportedly arriving in Saudi Arabia.

They also take note of the reports which claim that hundreds of powerful bunker buster bombs have been moved to the United States’ base on the British Island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, which I also recently covered.

However, some say that the West and allied nations are not truly prepared for a war and all that it would bring, something which I have to say I agree with to some extent.

Vladimir Sazhin of the Institute of Oriental Studies told the Voice of Russia, “All countries involved in this conflict are facing domestic problems. An election race has got under way in the US. Parliamentary elections in Iran have been set for March 2nd, and presidential elections have been scheduled for the summer of 2013. France’s presidential elections are just round the corner, and Europe as a whole is too preoccupied with its own economic problems to handle another war.”

Yet Sazhin also correctly emphasizes that the unrelenting buildup of Western military assets in the Gulf region is making for a potentially explosive situation.

He notes that it would take nothing more than a single accidental shot from either side to trigger fire and thus all-out conflict.

This is quite true, and with the possibility of renewed military drills in the region, the situation only becomes that much more likely.

Sazhin says that if an accidental shot sparks fire from both sides, the allies will have an advantage due to the many assets located near Iran belonging to the West and the lack of allies in the region on Iran’s part.

“Should military operations start, the United States will send powerful naval groups backed by a large number of planes, and strategic bombers will fly from the Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean. The US will be joined by Britain, France and Arab oil-producing monarchies in the Gulf. Iran has no allies in the region. Syria is not in the best of shape to support it. Tehran can count only on Hezbollah in Lebanon and possibly, on Hamas in Gaza,” Sazhin said.

However, this is only considering allies in the region, as I believe there is a real possibility that Russia and China might come to Iran’s aid if it were to get attacked by such a large coalition.

The Voice of Russia very aptly highlights the fact that these troop buildups, which obviously pose an existential threat to Iran, act to torpedo the talks between Iran and international organizations surrounding their alleged nuclear program.

“Many countries, first of all Russia, believe that neither using force nor imposing sanctions will help resolve the conflict,” the Voice of Russia writes.

Russia has definitely been one of the most vocal on these fronts, with Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s Ambassador to the United Nations, making repeated statements on the matter.

“Sanctions have long become ineffective, so the Iranian issue has no room in the UN Security Council. The six-party talks on Iran and talks between the IAEA and Iran should take center stage on the international agenda because they give some hope. IAEA representatives are currently visiting Iran to look into the possibilities of arranging a six-party meeting with Iran. Even though there is hope, the increasing confrontation between the West and Iran is causing more and more concern. The Iran problem is going to be the hottest in 2012,” Churkin said.

The statements from Churkin have made it painfully clear that the West really has no interest in peaceful resolution, nor the fact that Iran is just pursuing the same peaceful nuclear technology as every other developed Western nation.

Seeing as United States Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has had to admit that Iran isn’t developing a nuclear weapon on no less than two separate occasions while still maintaining the nonsensically heated rhetoric, it is evident that the American government cares not about the actual nature of their nuclear ambitions.

The Voice of Russia states that Russia’s concerns are shared by every member nation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, which, if true, means that Iran is not actually alone in the world but indeed has some allies who would come to their aid if unjustly attacked.

They note that China is one of the other most major (and I might add, militarily formidable) international players who opposes a military operation targeting Iran, although warnings from both China and Russia have been ignored completely by the United States, Israel and the many other allied nations.

The question remains unanswered: what exactly would Russia and China do if the West actually launches an overt strike on Iran instead of continuing the covert operations and targeted killings we see right now?

It is impossible to say with any amount of certainty but given Russia’s military presence in Syria, I can bet that they would take it seriously.

However, Russia has drawn a much harder line when it comes to Western intervention in Syria compared to the situation with Iran, especially when one considers the weapons being given to Syria along with the presence of Russian military vessels which, as far as we know, is not happening in the case of Iran.

That being said, I think that Russia might actually side with Iran in such a scenario with China following suit, partly because China has a strong reliance on Iranian oil and partly because both nations stand as a kind of last bastion against total Western hegemony and global subservience to Western interests.

Obviously I hope most of all that the West isn’t insane enough to enter such a conflict knowing what could ensue, but seeing as they are willing to open so many different fronts around the world and put so many lives on the line, I cannot rule it out.

Even with the clear Russian and Chinese opposition to military actions against Iran, I cannot say that our so-called leaders are sensible enough to avoid a conflict altogether and instead accept that other countries can pursue peaceful nuclear technology as well and choose to not be a part of the global private banking system or the many other Western-dominated industries.

5 Responses to Why does the West seem to be ignoring Russia and China in their approach to Iran?

  1. Anonymous February 3, 2012 at 4:49 AM

    In your emails you have made it clear that you do not support the governments of china or russia in anyway

    i think people might think youre esomehow supporting them in this post. that just isnt true. please make that clear next time. i know you support liberty and justice – things which russia and china are NOT about 😉

    • Anonymous February 3, 2012 at 5:16 AM

      if that isn’t painfully obvious to everyone by now theyre retarded

    • Also Anonymous February 3, 2012 at 9:51 AM

      What’s liberty & justice got to do with anything?
      The American government gave up on those when they pushed through the Patriot Act and subsequent laws in the name of the “war on terrorism”.
      American conduct in the last 40 years has brought nothing but war, suffering & misery for the world.

      Given the alternative I think the world will be a better place with the Russians & Chinese opposing Obama & his war criminals.

  2. denk February 4, 2012 at 6:58 PM

    *i think people might think youre esomehow supporting them in this post. that just isnt true. please make that clear next time. i know you support liberty and justice – things which russia and china are NOT about *

    every time someone opposed another fukusi r2p scam
    some sock puppets would pop up n yell
    *u’re supporting gadaffi, assad, china, russian blah blah…..*
    is that what they teach u in the *briefing* ?
    it has become rather stale kid !

    just curious,
    pray tell
    whom do u think represents this *liberty n justice* thingee kid ?

  3. liesdamage February 10, 2012 at 6:44 PM

    Rob, I don’t get your logic…….nukes hurt everyone, who are the biggest bullies on the block??


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>