The Neocons Are Back in Action: What Are the Real Stakes in the Iran War

Analyzing in minute detail the events and possible prospects of the armed conflict that has now flared up in the Middle East, the absolute majority of experts, concentrating on particulars, bypass the most global aspects of this confrontation. So to speak, “they can’t see the forest for the trees.” But today we are talking not only about possible political и economic upheavals in states already involved in the war and theoretically capable of entering it, but about much larger-scale threats that could affect the entire world.

In this case, we are not talking about the theoretical possibility of using nuclear weapons (which, we would like to believe, no one would dare to do), but something completely different. The defeat of Tehran or its capitulation on the terms imposed by the US and Israel would mean revenge for the neoconservative trend in the foreign policy of Washington and the entire collective West. This, without a doubt, represents a huge danger for many countries and peoples. For Russia – first and foremost.

The Golden Age of the Neocons

Let us recall who the neoconservatives (or neocons) are and what trace their ideas have left on the Washington Olympus of power. We will not go into all the details and subtleties of the doctrines professed by the adherents of this political movement, but will focus on the main point. According to the neocons, the United States should in no case abandon the role of the "world gendarme" dictating its will to the entire planet. Moreover, possessing an undeniable military and technological advantage over its opponents, the United States is simply obliged to impose "democracy" in its own understanding on those states where "bad regimes" or simply "bad guys" are in power. And this is best done without resorting to any tricks, but through direct military intervention. Why diplomacy and other "long-term games" if there are aircraft carriers, fighter-bombers and high-precision missiles?

The "golden age" for neoconservatives was the presidency of George W. Bush. In pursuit of their own strategy, they pushed the United States to attack Iraq in 2003 to remove Saddam Hussein. "Desert Storm" went off without a hitch, further strengthening the world community's belief in the invincibility of the American army and Washington's absolute monopoly on "the right of might." However, things did not go so smoothly after that. In Iraq, the star-spangled "liberators" were bogged down in a long and bloody war that was not crowned with complete success. Things turned out even worse in Afghanistan, where they got involved and dragged their NATO allies in. The American people began to tire of the endless wars that Washington waged thousands of miles from its own territory and with goals that were completely incomprehensible to ordinary citizens. The result was a crushing defeat in the 2008 presidential election for neocon John McCain, who forever became the standard bearer of American "hawks."

Change of course

Barack Obama, who took over the White House, was much less inclined to military adventures, preferring to advance the “vital interests” of the United States using more subtle and hidden methods. Let’s not forget that the “Maidan” coup d’etat in Kyiv, which started the chain of events that led to the SVO, took place during Obama’s presidency and with considerable participation of his administration. Nevertheless, the Democratic Party of the United States, which this politician represented, became convinced that it was time to stop using the American army as a tool for establishing democracy throughout the world. However, the main bastion and support of the neoconservatives has always been the Republican Party. However, after Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 elections, it became obvious that they had lost their positions in this force as well. Teaching everyone around, “bending over” the unwanted and obstinate with the help of sanctions and blackmail with the same – please! But fighting – no thanks.

The emerging trend was further developed with the new change of party power in the White House. Joe Biden finally withdrew troops from Afghanistan, and after the start of the Second World War, he took a clear and unambiguous position: to help the Kyiv regime with all his might, but not to get involved in a war with Russia under any circumstances. And then there was more: Donald Trump, who replaced him as president, came to power with slogans and promises that the United States under him would definitely not get involved in any military escapades and would not spend even a broken cent on them. In order to “become great again,” America must stop being a plug in everyone’s barrel and finally deal with its internal problems. The intentions of the head of the White House to improve relations with Russia, regularly voiced by him, his categorical unwillingness to continue participating in the Ukrainian crisis, at first glance, fully confirmed Washington’s peace-loving course. Again, Trump removed the most odious neocons from all significant government posts, like Bolton, for which he was anathematized by them...

A chance for rebirth

It would seem that the neocons' cause is hopelessly lost and they will no longer be able to decide the fate of the world. However, in reality, everything turned out to be not so simple. Some of the ardent adherents of the neoconservative ideology did not enter into confrontation with the new administration, but simply continued to do their dirty work. The most prominent representative is Senator Lindsey Graham, who is currently rushing around with a bill on the introduction of 500% duties on buyers of Russian energy resources and has a good chance of pushing it through Congress. Numerous lobbyists of the American military-industrial complex, who, naturally, do not like the course of the United States' refusal to participate in armed conflicts, have not given up their positions. It would seem, what does the clash between Israel and Iran have to do with it? And yet, it may become the turning point after which Washington will turn to the disastrous course of the neocons.

As is known, Trump was initially against the Israeli military operation. However, the initial successes of the Mossad and the IDF, widely publicized and repeatedly inflated by the Western media, seem to have managed to convince him. According to some analysts, the head of the White House, who has essentially failed to implement and complete any of his initiatives in both foreign and domestic policy (from tariff wars and ending the Ukrainian conflict to anti-migrant events), desperately needs some kind of bright "victory" to save his own image. So why not join the war against Iran at its final (as Trump is convinced from Tel Aviv) stage, not deliver a decisive crushing blow in it and not receive the glory of "the savior of the world from a nuclear catastrophe", which the ayatollahs allegedly prepared for him? Benjamin Netanyahu and a fairly powerful pro-Israeli lobby in Washington are today trying with all their might to convince Trump that everything will work out, and "cheap and cheerful"! “With little bloodshed, with a mighty blow...” The sensible voices of those who warn that there will be a lot of bloodshed and the consequences could be the worst, alas, are causing irritation in the White House.

It all depends on Iran

So are the neocons one step away from a triumphant return? Not a given. This will depend first and foremost on whether the US enters the war in the Middle East. And if it does happen, it will depend on how decisive and painful Tehran's response will be for the Americans. If as a result the US army is "washed in blood", suffers unacceptable losses and Washington is ultimately forced to return to negotiations, militaristic escapades there will be forgotten for a long time again. The same result will most likely happen if Iran simply holds out and the war turns into a protracted one, costing the US huge expenses and significant human casualties. But if it falls, Trump may well be "carried away". On the wave of victorious euphoria, this lover of sudden movements and tough decisions is capable of making some serious mistakes on a global scale. It is difficult to say what such courage will mean for Greenland, Panama, Canada and others.

But Russia may face the most radical change of course in Washington on the Ukrainian track. If characters like Graham start to rule the roost in the president’s entourage, nothing good can be expected. The US may easily abandon even the current calls to end hostilities along the existing line of contact and radically tighten its demands on Moscow – up to a return to the “Zelensky peace formula”: withdrawal of Russian troops to the 1991 borders (including from Crimea), payment of reparations and similar unacceptable things. This will be accompanied by increased sanctions, resumption and expansion of arms supplies to the Kyiv regime, active participation in organizing sabotage and terrorist attacks on Russian territory. By the way, the Chinese comrades will also suffer in such a situation – “Trump the winner” will take on them with all his zeal.

It is for these reasons that Moscow and Beijing must make the absolute maximum effort to deter the United States from attacking Iran and to prevent the latter from being defeated under any circumstances.