WILL IRAN REPUBLIC LIVE TO SEE ITS 40TH ANNIVERSARY?

WILL IRAN REPUBLIC LIVE TO SEE ITS 40^TH ANNIVERSARY? 

By Boris Gulko

In a recent essay on World War II, I digressed from the question about it’s beginning with the phrase: "Two spiders in one jar didn’t get along." But it’s still a mystery: why did Stalin and Hitler consider it necessary to attack each other? Reich by that time conquered half of Europe from the river Bug to the Atlantic. The USSR also acquired vast territories - the whole of the Baltic States, a piece of Romania, half of Poland. Why not live and rejoice in having a buddy who shares one’s passion for looting and robbing?

The war was dangerous for the leaders. For Hitler it became disastrous, and Stalin for a long time was worried for his life. I'm not even talking about tens of millions of war-ravaged lives of common citizens, of whom the dictators care not at all. So why the bloodbath – WWII – became inevitable?

The regimes of these two countries - the USSR and the Third Reich - were aggressors by the nature of their ideologies. As it is ridiculous to be offended by viper’s bite because it’s viper’s nature, it’s just as wrong to marvel at the aggressiveness of the Communists and the Nazis.

Sometimes the nature of individual -- the desire for violence --  can be embedded in their personality. In this case, they go into kickboxing, in "fights without rules," get hired to be assassins, or join the army. Wars free societies from them, thus making them useful.

Al-Qaeda, ISIS, HAMAS have become such "suction action” which absorbed aggressors from Middle Eastern everyday life.

The inherent aggressor state, since the success of the 1979 revolution, is the Islamic Republic of Iran. The most talented of modern US presidents, Jimmy Carter, became the midwife of IRI birth. He forbade the army of the Shah of Iran, on which America had great influence, to suppress the actions of the Islamists with fire, and then did not respond to the open act of war by the new government when the "Islamic Revolutionary Guards" seized the US embassy and kept the Americans hostages.

Closer to the election of 1980, Carter, after all, sanctioned the failed attempt to free the hostages, as incompetent, as anything he touched.

In general, the US is not associated with any particular ideology. Much depends on the personality of the president and the case in question. Anglophile and socialist F. D. Roosevelt joined the WWII on the side of Stalin, whom he liked, although voices were heard to support Hitler or to be neutral. The recognition of Israel by the Truman administration was the result of circumstances and intrigues. Eisenhower in the Suez War of 1956 unexpectedly sidestepped Gamal Abdel Nasser against the traditional allies of the United States -- England and France, and then forced Israel to give back Sinai to Egypt which Israel won earlier. In all the conflicts between Christians and Muslims, Clinton  took the Muslim side.

Caroline Glick recently wrote: "Since the Iranian revolution of 1979, the US has consistently defended Iran and its protégées from Israel. In 1982, the United States forced Israel to withdraw its troops from Beirut. In 2006, the US insisted that Israel accept the terms of the ceasefire in the war with Hezbollah, which left the Lebanese proxy of Iran to South Lebanon and paved the way for its seizure of the government in 2008. During the Obama administration, the United States shielded Iran from Israel on several fronts. "

Most clearly the indifference of Americans to the questions of ideology is demonstrated in their tolerance to Obama's candidly Islamic policy. The President deftly brought to power the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Islamist terrorists in Libya, dismissed the five bloody Taliban leaders, having received an American deserter in exchange, and turned Israel into an outcast state. When Obama lifted sanctions from Iran, he thawed about 150 billion dollars, and paid half a billion of government money for three hostages, sending a plane full of cash under the cover of the night to the Iranian ayatollahs, and there was not a word of displeasure spoken by the American public.

As once the USSR and the Third Reich, the IRI regime can exist only in a state of war or preparation for it. In a peaceful life, it is threatened with extinction. The economy is rotting. Iranian women don’t want to give birth. Their birth rate in cities is now 1.5 children per woman, and in villages less than two. There is a demographic degeneration. Venereal diseases are widespread – and this is with a high morality of the population. Instead of random encounters,  the Persians pay small amount of money to mullah and marry for a short time - for an hour, for two hours,  for at night. It’s a form of holy prostitution.

An outstanding sociologist David Goldman wrote: "People doomed to cultural extinction can choose war if war promises the slightest chance of survival ... Islamists fear that in case of their failure their religion and culture disappear, they will be washed away by modern way of life.  Many of them would prefer to die fighting."

Until recently, however, Iran was lucky. It was approaching domination in the Middle East. In addition to Lebanon, the IRI controls Iraq, Syria, the Iranian client is successful in the civil war in Yemen. A common idea is needed to unite the people. In this, the leaders of Iran followed the path of the Third Reich, choosing the Jews to be the common enemies as the uniting element. One can also see a mystical connection between Iran and the Reich. After all, "true Aryans[H1] " by definition are the Persians. Hitler was an impostor.

The first serious acts of war against the Jews were two terrorist acts organized by the Iranian Embassy in remote Buenos Aires - on March 17, 1992 against the Israeli Embassy - 29 killed and 242 wounded, and on July 18, 1994 in the Jewish community center - 85 killed and more than 200 wounded. All the kids in the kindergarten located in this center perished.

The world reacted to the atrocities of the IRI indifferently. Then the Iranian ayatollahs set a goal closer and larger - the "Zionist entity" itself. They overlaid Israel from all sides. The first battles went well for Iranian supporters.

In the north of Israel, the second Lebanon war with the Lebanese Shiite organization Hezbollah happened in July-August 2006, lasted 34 days and ended in a draw. Every shot of Israeli artillery was registered by lawyers attached to all parts. The rockets of Hezbollah, housed in private houses, were considered inviolable. The Israeli leadership several times set the date of invasion of its troops, then postponed it. Finally, the UN Security Council announced a ceasefire.
 

The next front of the war with Israel formed in the south of Israel. Hamas, equipped with Iran, sent thousands of rockets to Israel. Two military Operation IDF "Cast Lead" (from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009), and the "Cloud Pillar" (from November 14 to November 21, 2012) to defeat the Hamas did not.

The third, most serious anti-Israeli front, according to the plan of the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, was laid in Syria. The Iranians made a major contribution to the defeat of the Sunni ISIS, Alawite Assad's regime was rescued together with their client Hezbollah and prepared a base for aggression against Israel. According to estimates of experts, about 20 billion dollars, freed by Obama went to create in Syria more than 50 military facilities - disguised bases for launching missiles, reconnaissance and command posts, weapons storages, radars and other military equipment. Although the alarming signal of the leaders of Iran probably did not go unnoticed: instead of the Islamists and their patron Obama, unexpectedly came an unpredictable Trump.

The rapid developments of the last days, similar to the development in a fascinating novel, turned out to be unexpected, I think, for everyone. It began with the fact that at the end of April, at night, unknown whose (unknown only for those without imagination)  planes bombed a base with 200 Iranian missiles in Syria. Some Iranians were killed, among them - a general.

The world did not have time to react to this unprovoked attack, because on May 1^st, the Holiday of Solidarity of Workers, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu arranged a grand show in Jerusalem. Before the reporters' eyes and the cameras of all the major news agencies in the world, he demonstrated half a ton of secret documents stolen in Tehran, proving that everyone knew that Iran was working on nuclear weapons. How such an operation could occur,  can’t be imagined. Such a kidnapping would be equal to stealing Lenin’s sarcophagus from Kremlin Mausoleum and putting it on display in a middle of Khreshchatyk, Kiev’s main street.

The US responded to the disclosure of Netanyahu by terminating the Obama-Iran treaty (the Senate did not approve this treaty).

Two successively arrogant actions of the Zionists demanded retribution. Iranian President Hassan Ruhani, however, felt uneasy and suggested to silently swallow a bitter pill. But the head of the corps of the "Guards of the Islamic Revolution" General Jaafari insisted on a reciprocal action to save the face. The night after the celebration of Victory Day in Moscow with Putin and Netanyahu on a visit there, with the military orchestra performing on the Red Square the anthem of Israel “HaTikvah”, the Iranian troops fired on Israel almost an obsequious volley of 20 missiles. 16 missiles landed in Syria, the remaining 4 God knows where. The Israelis said  they shot down these missiles, but I admit that the Iranians aimed at open spaces, which are many in the Golan Heights. It seems that the Iranian military wanted to say with this attack: "It's nothing personal, we just want to show that we are men too and can’t be humiliated constantly at will."

The Israelis were preparing for such a turn, and they didn’t miss the opportunity. Almost immediately they conducted a massive bombing of all Iranian military facilities in Syria. It was, according to experts, Israel's largest military operation since the days of the "Judgment Day War" of 1973. All the Iranian military equipment mentioned above, on which 20 billion dollars was spent, or who knows how much, has turned into a heap of scrap metal.

After that, Israel complained to UN about Iran's missile attack, and Britain, France and Germany condemned Iran for this attack.

Iran's response was modest. They distributed a photo of their supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini, who reads the Farsi translation of anti-Tramp book “Fire and Fury”. It seems that the Trump opposition has acquired a new member. I doubt thought that it's a valuable addition.

The future of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the light of recent events is extremely bleak. According to polls, 75% of Iranian youth are opposed to the authorities. They are accused of squandering the defrosted Obama’s money for external adventures to the detriment of the urgent needs of the Iranians. The IRI's finances suffer from monstrous inflation. The euro exchange rate was 70 thousand rials[H2] , and after recent events lost 40% of their value.  Now the threat of new and heavy economic sanctions is hanging over the Iranian economy. The population of Iran is well educated - much better than in neighboring countries, and tired of demolishing economical consequences of ideological nonsense of Islamist authorities.

But the main thing is that these authorities became an object of ridicule. They are not afraid of, they are being mocked. In recent years, there have already been two major uprisings against Islamist leaders, the third is expected. WSJ reported on May 6 on "hundreds of recent outbreaks of labor unrest in Iran." Bret Stevens in

NYTimes concludes: "The conditions that led to the so-called “green movement of 2009” arose in Iran again."

The most sensitive of non-US observers predict a change of power in Tehran. Caroline Glick of “Jewish Press” suggests: "The United States wants not only to review the deal with the mullahs how to change the regime ... Strikes, demonstrations, riots and other expressions of popular disgust towards the regime are frequent in Iran." Although the authorities have nowhere to retreat: "If the internal opposition gets power, the current leaders will be hanged - they will not be able to leave the country, because they have nowhere to run."

Melanie Phillips, in The London “Times” poses the task: "All efforts should now be directed at encouraging and supporting the Iranian people so that they can topple their leaders."

It can be hoped that to the question: “whether the IRI regime will exist before its 40th anniversary”, we will get an answer - no, it will collapse before.

Translated by Alla Axerod  May 17, 2017

---

 [H1]In Sanskrit, the definition of “aryan” refers to  hypothetical ethnic type illustrated or descended from early speakers of Indo-European languages.

 [H2]Rial – Iranian currency