It goes to war: US and Iran raise rates
Over the Persian Gulf, a military thunderstorm is again gathering. The confrontation between the United States of America and Iran predictably moves from the stage of mutual accusations and threats to the phase when one not too significant incident may well be enough to start a full-scale military conflict. Speaking in terms of a dueling code, opponents converge at the barrier and their pistols are cocked ... What is the likelihood that the triggers will be released? Let's try to figure it out together.
Everyone remembers that the start of the current confrontation was laid by the US unilateral withdrawal in May 2018 from the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan (JCPOA) or the so-called "nuclear deal" concluded with Iran in 2015 by representatives of the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France, Russia and China. The essence of the transaction was simple - Tehran refuses to produce weapons-grade uranium or to obtain it by any other means, dismantles or reprofiles all facilities that can work to receive nuclear weapons. In response, they’ll be removed from him, albeit in stages, economic restrictions and sanctions. The termination of the contract was initiated personally by Donald Trump, who at the stage of the election race declared it “initially defective” and “not in line with American interests”. In general, the farther, the more the feeling that the "Iranian issue" is just an idefix for both the owner of the White House and for many people in his environment.
Stop Trump, firmly embarked on the "warpath" was no longer possible. Neither the objections of the other parties to the transaction, nor the European “allies” of the United States, nor the sworn assurances of the IAEA that Iran had been fulfilling and were still fulfilling its part of the agreement precisely during this time acted on it. To the thunderous applause of Israel (perhaps the only country in the world that enthusiastically accepted the presidential election), Washington began to systematically and methodically carry out the main point of its own program - the destruction of the Iranian economy. The whole plan on this issue boiled down, in essence, to a single point: to completely block Tehran’s path for oil export, on which, in fact, to a very large extent, the national economy of this country is based.
At the same time, of course, another good intention was declared, which the United States would have enough not only for the road, but for the wide avenue leading to the address mentioned in the corresponding saying. Like, all this is necessary solely for Iran to "stop sponsoring terrorism" and not be able to "develop its own missile program." In fact, it is perfectly clear that in such a tried and tested way the State Department and the White House are trying to bring the country to economic collapse, and, as a result, a social explosion, using which it will be possible to change an unwanted “regime” to power completely controlled by the Americans. In fact, the option of military invasion was probably initially considered by the United States solely as an aid to the implementation of just such a scheme.
In April of this year, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo proudly “reported on the work done” - according to him, the imposed sanctions at that time had already reduced the annual export of “black gold” from Iran (estimated at $ 50 billion) by more than 10 billion. However, this was clearly a result, very far from the promised “zeroing” of Tehran’s oil revenues, which prompted the Americans to take the next step. At the end of April, the abolition of “concessions” was announced for eight states that were given permission to buy Iranian oil, despite the sanctions, “for a while”. May 10, this time is up. Most painfully, such a decision hit the largest Iranian trading partners - China, India, Turkey. It’s very clever, as the saying goes, “two birds with one stone” - Washington at once raised sharply the stakes in the conflict with Tehran, and pretty much ruined those countries with which it has not developed relations very recently.
The remaining events that accompanied the main scenario can be considered a “common canvas”. Washington’s announcement of the elite units of the Iranian Armed Forces as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the proclamation by Tehran of the US Army command in the Middle East as terrorists by Washington, perhaps, didn’t surprise anyone. Continuous threats from the White House and assurances of “readiness to use military force if necessary”, as well as the promise of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to “bring America to its knees” in this show sound like a familiar refrain ... However, over time, like that it was expected that the opponents began to move from words to deeds.
A huge role here, of course, was played by the intention declared by Tehran to block the Strait of Hormuz in the event of real attempts to completely block the export of oil from the country. The classic "so don’t get to anyone!" The answer to the question of whether Iran can physically carry out its own threat sounds very clear: Easy! The strait indicated above, which is, in fact, a “bottleneck” between the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, in some places is some 40 kilometers wide. This space (part of which is included in the territorial waters of coastal states) is divided into several narrow (according to marine standards) transport corridors three kilometers wide. It is precisely through them that the supertankers export “black gold” from Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.
In fact, for the complete blockage of this transport artery, giving the world a third of the oil consumed in it, a few correctly placed antediluvian anchor mines are enough. And considering Tehran’s presence of a submarine fleet and anti-ship missiles, the prospect is more than clear. The blockade is technically possible if the Iranians are brought to the fact that they will decide on it. However, this is far from the only "trump card" in their hands. A much more unpleasant signal for the West was the statement made by Iran on May 8 that it temporarily (for 60 days) ceases to fulfill two points of the “nuclear deal” - regarding the sale of enriched uranium and “heavy water”. In the event that within two months the “JCPOA partners” do not find a way to “protect Iran from the US sanctions that are damaging to it,” other points of the transaction will be rejected.
Europe, as expected, responded to the demarche with an “expression of concern” and demands for Tehran to abide by the terms of the treaty, no matter what. China promised to “control the situation to prevent escalation” and blamed the US for everything that was happening. The United States introduced new sanctions against Iran, now related to the country's metallurgical products, and began to transfer troops to the Middle East. White House National Security Advisor John Bolton promised Tehran "the use of ruthless force." We talked ...
The sending to the Persian Gulf of an attack aircraft carrier group led by aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, which Jim Malloy, the commander of the Fifth Fleet of the US Navy, has already promised to "lead if necessary through the Strait of Hormuz," as well as the relocation of the number of B-52 strategic bombers to the El Udeid in Qatar and Al-Dafra in the United Arab Emirates - this is serious. Following this, the transfer to the same region of the Arlington amphibious assault ship and Patriot air defense system is nothing more than a very real and concrete preparation for a large-scale war. At the same time, Washington figures like the same Pompeo continue to make cynical statements about "openness for dialogue with Tehran," and Donald Trump calls on the Iranian leadership to "contact him" for negotiations, saying that it's time for you to give up.
Tehran reacts to everything that happens, frankly, without panic. Amir Ali Hajizade, the commander of the air force divisions of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said that “an aircraft carrier with fifty airplanes and six thousand soldiers”, which had pinned to scare them, was “not a threat, but an opportunity” for the IRGC. “Let only the Americans take the next step — they will get a blow to the head!” Meanwhile, Deputy Corps Commander Hossein Salame accused Washington of starting a “psychological war” in the region, and his colleague Yadollah Javani added that under such circumstances, Mr. Trump might not even count on any negotiations. At the same time, all high-ranking Iranian military men are firmly convinced that the United States "will not dare to start hostilities." However, is that so?
In fact, nobody needs a big war in Washington. Persuaded by hatred of Iran, like the senator of ancient Rome who went down in history and was obsessed with the destruction of Carthage, figures like Bolton and Pompeo are not taken into account. After all, they are not all the power in the USA. The same Trump, as practice shows, perfectly understands the difference between the rattling of weapons and their use for their intended purpose. Surely there are enough professionals in his circle who can explain to the president that a second Iraq will not work in this case. And the Iraq campaign, by and large, did not bring anything good - neither to the world, nor to the United States. The flow of coffins and people with disabilities (and in this case it will most likely be several times higher), the huge costs of maintaining the occupation corps and the out-of-control terrorists represented by ISIS. And this is far from a complete list of “bonuses”.
On the other hand, the United States, and in particular, personally Donald Trump, needs a “resounding” foreign policy victory right now. With the “denuclearization” of North Korea, it all ended in a blatant farce. Syria did not grow together, I had to get out. In Venezuela, too, it doesn’t work out in any way ... Who would be “forced to obedience” and bestow the fruits of democracy ?! However, Iran is definitely not the training ground at which the US should try to hone its own “carrier diplomacy”. If an armed conflict does break out between countries, its extremely serious consequences will have to be dismantled by the whole world, without any exaggeration. Not without reason, even in Tel Aviv, they somewhat tempered the enthusiasm for the Americans' “hitting” their long-standing enemy. For example, the Minister of Energy of Israel, Yuval Steinitz, did not express a joyful idea that his country could suffer as a result. The German Foreign Ministry almost shouted at all about the “inadmissibility of an armed conflict” between the USA and Iran ...
Once again, having found itself on the verge of a hotbed of war that will inevitably affect everyone and can have absolutely unpredictable development, mankind begins to think about whether it will survive another “continuation” policy by other means. " The main thing is that these thoughts should not be belated.
Everyone remembers that the start of the current confrontation was laid by the US unilateral withdrawal in May 2018 from the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan (JCPOA) or the so-called "nuclear deal" concluded with Iran in 2015 by representatives of the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France, Russia and China. The essence of the transaction was simple - Tehran refuses to produce weapons-grade uranium or to obtain it by any other means, dismantles or reprofiles all facilities that can work to receive nuclear weapons. In response, they’ll be removed from him, albeit in stages, economic restrictions and sanctions. The termination of the contract was initiated personally by Donald Trump, who at the stage of the election race declared it “initially defective” and “not in line with American interests”. In general, the farther, the more the feeling that the "Iranian issue" is just an idefix for both the owner of the White House and for many people in his environment.
Washington is starting, and ...
Stop Trump, firmly embarked on the "warpath" was no longer possible. Neither the objections of the other parties to the transaction, nor the European “allies” of the United States, nor the sworn assurances of the IAEA that Iran had been fulfilling and were still fulfilling its part of the agreement precisely during this time acted on it. To the thunderous applause of Israel (perhaps the only country in the world that enthusiastically accepted the presidential election), Washington began to systematically and methodically carry out the main point of its own program - the destruction of the Iranian economy. The whole plan on this issue boiled down, in essence, to a single point: to completely block Tehran’s path for oil export, on which, in fact, to a very large extent, the national economy of this country is based.
At the same time, of course, another good intention was declared, which the United States would have enough not only for the road, but for the wide avenue leading to the address mentioned in the corresponding saying. Like, all this is necessary solely for Iran to "stop sponsoring terrorism" and not be able to "develop its own missile program." In fact, it is perfectly clear that in such a tried and tested way the State Department and the White House are trying to bring the country to economic collapse, and, as a result, a social explosion, using which it will be possible to change an unwanted “regime” to power completely controlled by the Americans. In fact, the option of military invasion was probably initially considered by the United States solely as an aid to the implementation of just such a scheme.
In April of this year, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo proudly “reported on the work done” - according to him, the imposed sanctions at that time had already reduced the annual export of “black gold” from Iran (estimated at $ 50 billion) by more than 10 billion. However, this was clearly a result, very far from the promised “zeroing” of Tehran’s oil revenues, which prompted the Americans to take the next step. At the end of April, the abolition of “concessions” was announced for eight states that were given permission to buy Iranian oil, despite the sanctions, “for a while”. May 10, this time is up. Most painfully, such a decision hit the largest Iranian trading partners - China, India, Turkey. It’s very clever, as the saying goes, “two birds with one stone” - Washington at once raised sharply the stakes in the conflict with Tehran, and pretty much ruined those countries with which it has not developed relations very recently.
The remaining events that accompanied the main scenario can be considered a “common canvas”. Washington’s announcement of the elite units of the Iranian Armed Forces as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the proclamation by Tehran of the US Army command in the Middle East as terrorists by Washington, perhaps, didn’t surprise anyone. Continuous threats from the White House and assurances of “readiness to use military force if necessary”, as well as the promise of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to “bring America to its knees” in this show sound like a familiar refrain ... However, over time, like that it was expected that the opponents began to move from words to deeds.
Boiling point?
A huge role here, of course, was played by the intention declared by Tehran to block the Strait of Hormuz in the event of real attempts to completely block the export of oil from the country. The classic "so don’t get to anyone!" The answer to the question of whether Iran can physically carry out its own threat sounds very clear: Easy! The strait indicated above, which is, in fact, a “bottleneck” between the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, in some places is some 40 kilometers wide. This space (part of which is included in the territorial waters of coastal states) is divided into several narrow (according to marine standards) transport corridors three kilometers wide. It is precisely through them that the supertankers export “black gold” from Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.
In fact, for the complete blockage of this transport artery, giving the world a third of the oil consumed in it, a few correctly placed antediluvian anchor mines are enough. And considering Tehran’s presence of a submarine fleet and anti-ship missiles, the prospect is more than clear. The blockade is technically possible if the Iranians are brought to the fact that they will decide on it. However, this is far from the only "trump card" in their hands. A much more unpleasant signal for the West was the statement made by Iran on May 8 that it temporarily (for 60 days) ceases to fulfill two points of the “nuclear deal” - regarding the sale of enriched uranium and “heavy water”. In the event that within two months the “JCPOA partners” do not find a way to “protect Iran from the US sanctions that are damaging to it,” other points of the transaction will be rejected.
Europe, as expected, responded to the demarche with an “expression of concern” and demands for Tehran to abide by the terms of the treaty, no matter what. China promised to “control the situation to prevent escalation” and blamed the US for everything that was happening. The United States introduced new sanctions against Iran, now related to the country's metallurgical products, and began to transfer troops to the Middle East. White House National Security Advisor John Bolton promised Tehran "the use of ruthless force." We talked ...
The sending to the Persian Gulf of an attack aircraft carrier group led by aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, which Jim Malloy, the commander of the Fifth Fleet of the US Navy, has already promised to "lead if necessary through the Strait of Hormuz," as well as the relocation of the number of B-52 strategic bombers to the El Udeid in Qatar and Al-Dafra in the United Arab Emirates - this is serious. Following this, the transfer to the same region of the Arlington amphibious assault ship and Patriot air defense system is nothing more than a very real and concrete preparation for a large-scale war. At the same time, Washington figures like the same Pompeo continue to make cynical statements about "openness for dialogue with Tehran," and Donald Trump calls on the Iranian leadership to "contact him" for negotiations, saying that it's time for you to give up.
Does anyone need war?
Tehran reacts to everything that happens, frankly, without panic. Amir Ali Hajizade, the commander of the air force divisions of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said that “an aircraft carrier with fifty airplanes and six thousand soldiers”, which had pinned to scare them, was “not a threat, but an opportunity” for the IRGC. “Let only the Americans take the next step — they will get a blow to the head!” Meanwhile, Deputy Corps Commander Hossein Salame accused Washington of starting a “psychological war” in the region, and his colleague Yadollah Javani added that under such circumstances, Mr. Trump might not even count on any negotiations. At the same time, all high-ranking Iranian military men are firmly convinced that the United States "will not dare to start hostilities." However, is that so?
In fact, nobody needs a big war in Washington. Persuaded by hatred of Iran, like the senator of ancient Rome who went down in history and was obsessed with the destruction of Carthage, figures like Bolton and Pompeo are not taken into account. After all, they are not all the power in the USA. The same Trump, as practice shows, perfectly understands the difference between the rattling of weapons and their use for their intended purpose. Surely there are enough professionals in his circle who can explain to the president that a second Iraq will not work in this case. And the Iraq campaign, by and large, did not bring anything good - neither to the world, nor to the United States. The flow of coffins and people with disabilities (and in this case it will most likely be several times higher), the huge costs of maintaining the occupation corps and the out-of-control terrorists represented by ISIS. And this is far from a complete list of “bonuses”.
On the other hand, the United States, and in particular, personally Donald Trump, needs a “resounding” foreign policy victory right now. With the “denuclearization” of North Korea, it all ended in a blatant farce. Syria did not grow together, I had to get out. In Venezuela, too, it doesn’t work out in any way ... Who would be “forced to obedience” and bestow the fruits of democracy ?! However, Iran is definitely not the training ground at which the US should try to hone its own “carrier diplomacy”. If an armed conflict does break out between countries, its extremely serious consequences will have to be dismantled by the whole world, without any exaggeration. Not without reason, even in Tel Aviv, they somewhat tempered the enthusiasm for the Americans' “hitting” their long-standing enemy. For example, the Minister of Energy of Israel, Yuval Steinitz, did not express a joyful idea that his country could suffer as a result. The German Foreign Ministry almost shouted at all about the “inadmissibility of an armed conflict” between the USA and Iran ...
Once again, having found itself on the verge of a hotbed of war that will inevitably affect everyone and can have absolutely unpredictable development, mankind begins to think about whether it will survive another “continuation” policy by other means. " The main thing is that these thoughts should not be belated.
Information