The situation in the Middle East remains tense. First of all, due to the
increasingly strained
relations between Iran and the United States.
Recently,
these relationships resemble a roller coaster: after the next peak of
exacerbation should be a temporary stabilization but at a level below the
previous one. Then a new incident takes place or another ultimatum by one
of the parties follow, and everything repeats again.
The Today website
has figured out what the main contradictions and interests of the parties are,
and whether any next peak of tension will lead to war.
From the history of relationships
Since
the late 70s of the last century, relations between the United States and Iran
could not be called warm.
For almost forty years, the states have not had
diplomatic relations, Washington is an ally of Israel and Saudi Arabia - states
that Iran considers direct competitors and enemies in the region.
Accordingly,
the attitude towards the USA in the country was, to put it mildly, cool.
However,
the key factor of tension between the countries was the Iranian nuclear the program, which the United States and Washington’s allies in the Middle East perceived
as the main security threat and the sanctions imposed by the United States by
the world community on Iran in connection with the development of this program.
On
the whole, the long list of Washington’s claims on Tehran included both the
financing of terrorist organizations in the Middle East and the violation of
human rights,
The situation began to change after 2013 after Hassan Rouhani was elected President of Iran. Note
that in Iran the president is not as politically significant a figure as the president is in the same United States.
Therefore, the steps were taken by
Rouhani towards the United States and the world community are the decision of
the elites of the Islamic state as a whole.
In
April 2015, the “Joint Comprehensive Action Plan” was signed - an agreement
between Iran and six world leaders: the United States, Britain, France, Russia, and China, which are permanent members of the UN Security Council, and Germany.
The
action plan, also known as the “nuclear deal,” envisioned Iran refusing to
develop nuclear weapons in exchange for a phased lifting of sanctions.
Under
the terms of the deal, Iran, in particular, made its nuclear centers open for
monitoring by the IAEA for 20 years and refused to enrich uranium.
In the response, economic restrictions were removed, primarily on Tehran’s sales of
oil. The signing of a nuclear deal was one of the factors behind the
decline in world oil prices in 2015.
New standoff
After
winning the election, the new US president, Donald Trump, said that the nuclear
deal was not in the national interest of the United States. In 2017,
The United States imposed sanctions against Iran (which was a direct violation of
the contract). And in
May 2018, the United States, despite the categorical protests of other
signatories, withdrew from the deal.
Attempts by
European allies of the United States to persuade Trump not to do this did not
change Washington’s decisions.
Iran,
in turn, said it was ready to comply with the terms of the agreement if other
signatory countries could compensate for Tehran’s losses from US sanctions and
manage to circumvent them.
A year later - in May of 2019 - Iran began a phased reduction in the fulfillment
of its obligations under the transaction. He does it absolutely
justifiably: Iran’s right to take such steps if the contract is violated by
other signatories is spelled out in the “Joint Comprehensive Action Plan”.
Thus,
in particular, President Rouhani stated that Iran had stopped shipping enriched
uranium to third countries. And consequently, it exceeded the quota for
nuclear fuel prescribed in the contract, which Tehran can store.
At the
beginning of July, the second step followed: Iran announced its intention to
enrich uranium above the agreed level. In fact, in this way, Iran tried to
encourage the signatories of the treaty - first of all, the EU states - to
continue cooperation, despite the US sanctions.
Muscle play
In
parallel with the troubles surrounding the treaty, the military confrontation
between the United States and Iran grew. On the territory of Syria, where
the US supported the opposition, and Iran - the Assad regime, it was actually a
direct clash.
In May 2019, the United States announced that it would send a
carrier-based strike force to the shores of Iran. And in June, the
countries were actually on the verge of war: after Iran
shot down an American drone worth a hundred and fifty
million dollars, Washington was ready to deliver targeted strikes on Iran. “10
minutes before the strike, I stopped him,” Trump later wrote
on social networks.
“At that time, the situation was really on the edge,” Alexander
Musienko, head of the Center for Military Law Studies, told the site today. She
especially became aggravated when an American drone was hit. The Americans
decided that Iran made it their rocket purposefully, and after that Trump even
gathered the leaders of both parties in the Congress for a meeting. And
such meetings are convened by the president on the eve of the introduction of
troops or the start of hostilities. Because everything was very serious,
"- said the expert.
What do the states want
Back
in May 2018, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced 12 points of
requirements for Iran. Among them - the cessation of work on the
enrichment of uranium, the cessation of the development of missiles capable of
carrying nuclear weapons, the cessation of funding of terrorist groups in the Middle East.
Pompeo noted that in the case of the fulfillment of these
points, the USA is ready to conclude a new bilateral treaty with Iran.
“In essence, the United States offered Iran to go for a
surrender, let's speak directly,” Ilya Kusa, an expert on international
politics and the Middle East at the Ukrainian Future Institute, said in a
comment to the Segodnya website. will never go, because regional surrender is
demanded of him on all fronts, the launch of American investors and TNCs - in
general, the return of what was in the days of the Shah. "
However,
most likely, Pompeo’s 12 points are a “maximum program,” designed to have the
opportunity to make concessions to Tehran in the event of the start of real
negotiations. But the sanctions and the game of military muscles - actions
designed to force Iran to enter into such negotiations and reconsider the
nuclear deal.
"The United States is not satisfied with the treaty that
was signed under Barack Obama. Trump argues his decision to withdraw from the
treaty by saying that the Iranian nuclear research program, in fact, was only
postponed for 20 years. And then Iran will be able to start it again. that the
sanctions are lifted untimely. Now the US wants to enter into an agreement
according to which Iran will forever refuse to enrich uranium, that is, close
nuclear programs forever. And Trump is trying to achieve this result in his
manner, trying to take all measures to pressure Iran, that s to persuade
Tehran to such an option agreement ", - said Alexander Musienko.
As
Ilya Kusa told the Today website, there are various visions in the White House
on how to achieve this. The first concept is that the Iranian issue can
and should be solved by force. Up to the support of a regime change in the
event of favorable circumstances. This approach is professed mainly by the
Republicans from the neoconservative right-wing, who worked in the Bush-Cheney
administration, and today in the Trump administration.
The
second approach is that neutralizing the Iranian threat is possible through
negotiations. If Iran takes foreign capital to itself, ties itself more
tightly to the world economy, it will make no sense to have nuclear weapons and
to behave aggressively. Barack Obama and his administration professed this
logic. Today, she also has her supporters in the White House.
"The Trump administration refused the deal, but now, since
the approaches are different, these two factions in the White House
administration cannot decide what to do. The radicals say they need war,
conflict, pressure and even limited strikes on Iran. What the US has Allies and
support of such an option that will force Tehran to sit down at the negotiating
table and capitulate, says Ilya Kusa she will inflict more RB all. "
According
to the expert, the president of the United States, Donald Trump, is in the
second group.
“Personally, he does not want war. He speaks about it and
believes that war is not what is necessary in this case. And then, one of the
main elements of his election campaign before the first term was the thesis“stop
spending on meaningless Middle Eastern wars.” And if he leads the United States
into such a war, it will be a disaster for him before the elections. He will
lose a significant part of his electorate, who chose him precisely because he
often criticized US military intervention in the Middle East, "says Ilya
Kusa.
What does Iran want?
Iran’s
wishes are simple: Tehran wants the nuclear deal to be signed by the
signatories in the form in which the treaty was concluded under President
Obama. Despite the initially weak position (Iran sought to get rid of
sanctions by any means), the Iranian authorities managed to reach the most
acceptable variant of the treaty. To refuse him is to risk getting the
worst conditions for yourself.
As
for the military confrontation, then, as Segodnya experts note, Tehran does not
want a war with the United States and its American allies, but is forced to go
on a rate hike.
"On the part of Iran, the meaning of actions in this
conflict depends on domestic policy. For political leadership, confrontation
with the United States is an important component of domestic policy, part of
internal legitimacy. Countries, "- says Ilya Kusa.
In
addition, the Iranian leadership is in a situation where it cannot act
aggressively, not adequately to the actions of the United States.
"Sanctions have been restored against them, troops are
being sent, and they are surrounded by bases. Here, for example, their drone
has flown. You are either knocking it down, demonstrating both the US and its
own population, including strength. Or showing weakness. Iran is not a country
where it is normal to demonstrate weakness. There you have to always be tough,
even at the cost of your own well-being. This, by the way, is something that
people in the United States do not understand, "the expert says.
All against war
So
will the current confrontation lead to a military conflict? Experts note that,
despite the reluctance of the parties to fight, any incident threatens to bring
the situation out of control.
"Both countries are in a stalemate situation. They do not
want war, but they are moving towards it at full speed because no one can
concede. It is clear that all this will end in negotiations. The only question
is who will make concessions first. And will the situation not come out of
control during the next incident, "- says Ilya Kusa.
According
to Alexander Musienko, the confrontation will continue, and the sides will
raise the stakes until someone makes concessions.
"As for the war, then theoretically it is possible. But I
do not think that today the United States could take such a step. It would be
illogical on the part of Trump, who withdraws his troops from Syria and other
hot spots. And then, Iran - a big country with a strong army. It just won't be
there. But the main thing is what purpose do the Americans set for themselves?
Why war? To reset the regime? Doubtful. The ultimate goal is to remove the
risks associated with Iran’s nuclear program. This can be achieved without war,
forcing Iran to make concessions, "- said the expert.
Not
ready for a full-scale war in the region and key allies of the United States.
"In Saudi Arabia, there is a part of elites led by
Crown Prince Mohammed ibn Salman, who, of course, wants to isolate Iran as much
as possible. For them, the ideal scenario would be to strike Iran, which would
weaken it, but at the same time "Ilya Kusa says. On the other hand, there
is an internal opposition that, although it has a negative attitude towards
Iran is opposed to the war. They believe that in the event of war, the Persian
Gulf monarchies will be the first to suffer. u with Udit no consensus on
this occasion They no longer look to the United States and sometimes a bit of
pushing, but I think when the time comes X, they will not do anything they are
not ready for war "-... the expert says.
0 Comments