U.S. goal of regime change in Iran
Easier said than done
Published May 26, 2006 6:50 PM
WW photo: Lal Roohk
Following are excerpts from a talk by Ardeshir Ommani, co-founder of the American-Iranian Friendship Committee, at the May 13-14 â€œPreparing for
the rebirth of the global struggle
for socialismâ€? conference.
As usual, the regime in Washington, with regard to its nuclear dispute with
Iran, has not respected the laws governing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
and has stubbornly resorted to deceitful procedural mechanisms that could be
used to exert pressure on the members of the Inter national Atomic Energy Agency
board and that of the United Nations Secu rity Council to consider approving a
resolution that would help to isolate Iran internationally and impose economic,
political and diplomatic sanctions against it.
After countless meetings of
the IAEA and several referrals from the United Nations’ nuclear monitoring
agency to the UN Security Council and vice versa, the U.S. and its European
Union partners aimed at framing Iran’s nuclear dispute in the context of
Chapter VII, meaning that the council’s decision will carry the force of
sanctions or even military intervention.
To accomplish their objectives,
the U.S.-European Union unsuccessfully tried to either win over the active or
tacit support of China and/or Russia for their sanctions policy or at least to
neutralize their impact, through abstention, on the final decisions of the
Security Council. In this regard the holy alliance of the imperialist powers has
failed miserably, since China and Russia have repeatedly stated that
Iran’s engagement in the development of civilian nuclear energy is within
the rights guaranteed by the NPT to the member states, and should not be
regarded as a violation of the treaty.
It is crucial to highlight that
this is not the first time Iran has been referred to the UN Security
Almost 54 years ago, when the democratically elected prime
minister of Iran, Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh, with the approval of Iran’s
consultative assembly and the support of the overwhelming majority of the
Iranian people, nationalized the Iranian oil industry, the British Labor
government in alliance with the Eisenhower administration declared that
nationalization threatened the security of the international community. Using
their power of influence in the UN, they were able to impose an embargo on the
export of Iranian oil.
Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh, with supporters
in front of Iranian parliament, was elected as
prime minister of Iran in 1951. On Aug. 19, 1953,
the CIA and British intelligence agencies
overthrew his government in an illegal,
bloody coup, replacing him with the hated
Shah of Iran. The 1979 Iranian revolution
forced the Shah into exile in the U.S.
The embargo weakened the economy and made Dr.
Mossadegh’s government vulnerable to political volatilities that paved the
way for the U.S.-British coup of 1953, which made Iranian oil resources
uncontrollably available to the U.S., British, French, and Dutch oil companies
that also manipulated Iran’s economic and political system through their
agent on the Peacock Throne, the Shah.
The dream of “regime
Today, the U.S. administration is making every effort to
repeat the scenario of 53 years ago.
To mobilize the forces of reaction
inside and outside Iran against the government of Dr. Mossadegh, U.S. President
Dwight Eisenhower blamed Mossadegh for the successes of the working-class and
communist movements in Iran, led by the Tudeh Party.
Washington is pursuing a two-pronged tactic: internationally charging the
government of Dr. Moham med Ahmadinejad with violating the Non-Proliferation
Treaty, and domestically blaming him for all the alleged ills of Iranian
society, namely lack of bourgeois democracy and mismanagement of the
The U.S. plan is to use all external and internal forces to
destabilize Iran economically and politically, and finally overthrow the current
government and establish a puppet regime that would be at the service of the
world’s largest corporations.
Washington’s plots against the Iranian people unrealizable is the new
condition of the balance of forces, domestically and internationally, in favor
of revolution and against counter-revolution.
First and foremost, the
government of the Islamic Republic is a product of the 1979 Revolution, and the
military force at its disposal is raised and trained from the bottom to the top.
In contrast, the military and the police force under the government of Mossadegh
primarily were trained by British and the U.S. military advisors, and their
allegiance was to the king.
With regard to international conditions, the
U.S. corporate government has picked challenges and confrontations with many
independent states and progressive movements all at the same time. Right after
Sept. 11, 2001, President George W. Bush said that “Americans should not
expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen.
Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with
us, or you are with the terrorists.”
This policy of hostility
toward many nations simultaneously has met with worldwide resistance. The
animosity of the U.S. capitalist system toward Cuba, the People’s
Democratic Republic of Korea, Venezuela, Bolivia, Syria, Iraq, Iran,
Afghanistan, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Arma nistan and even China, to name a few, has
resulted in its inability to isolate Iran regionally and
Today, more than ever in the recent past, Iran has
developed comprehensive ties with these countries, not to mention amicable
relations with revolutionary movements in Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon.
is my strong conviction that in the current conflict, a relative victory of Iran
over the United States and its partners is a serious step toward exhausting U.S.
imperialism’s resources and revitalizing the forces of
Shift in the world balance of
There are titanic shifts in the balance of power from West to
East and from North to South. Is Washington losing Latin America? An article by
Peter Hakim in Foreign Affairs magazine highlights that: “In the past
decade, nearly a dozen elected Latin American presidents have been forced from
Hakim chose not to mention that these heads of states had
climbed to power during the period in which Washington’s neoliberal
economic policies reigned supreme and the burden of colossal national debt
condemned the masses of the continent to poverty, destitution and
The plans of the IMF, the World Bank and U.S.
regional pacts have subjected Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Mexico and Colombia,
not to mention Chile and Argen tina, to deep social, ethnic and regional
divisions. The gaps between the haves and the have-nots have ever
As far back as in July 2004, James Hoge Jr., in the article
“Global Power Shift in the Making” that appeared in Foreign Affairs
magazine, wrote: “Global power shifts hap pen rarely and are even less
often peaceful. Washington must take heed. Asia is rising fast, with its growing
economic power translating into political and military
“The transfer of power from West to East is gathering pace
and soon will dramatically change the context for dealing with international
challenges. ... Many in the West are already aware of Asia’s growing
Since then, many changes have taken place, including
Russia’s decision to take control of its oil resources and strengthen its
domestic security, and helping some of the countries in the Near East to ask the
United States to close down its military bases.
It is in this
international background that the Iranian government draws its strength to
withstand the pressure by the United States and its European imperialist
The possibility of sanctions and
Should the U.S. ruling class be desperate and adventurous enough
to impose illegal embargoes on Iran’s import-export and foreign
investment, what will be the depth and the extent of the damage to the Iranian
According to Abbas Milani, co-director of the Iran Democracy
Project at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, “Any sanction
that does not include oil will not have any serious effect.”
what if the sanctions go as far as including oil and gas?
Milani and other semi-official experts, such inclusions are highly improbable
because having the oil prices at $70 a barrel as a base makes the economy
vulnerable to stagflation and much lower growth. A strict embargo on Iranian oil
will easily send the price of oil well above $100 per barrel, which could plunge
the world capitalist economy into a deep and lasting recession.
been under a U.S.-limited sanction for more than two decades. This has prevented
U.S. companies from purchasing oil or investing in the Iranian oil industry. It
also prohibits the companies of other countries from investing in Iran’s
Since such an embargo does not have the UN’s
blessings, U.S. law enforcement agencies have been unable to stop other
countries from investing in Iran’s oil and gas industries.
Not too long ago, the president of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez,
stated that if Washington tries to carry out aggressive acts against Venezuela,
he will not send even a drop of oil to the United States.
The same will be
true with Iran’s oil flowing to Europe and Japan. Iran’s line of
defense will rest on one basic tenet—not one drop—which means that
Iran in the long run will disrupt the flow of oil by destroying American oil
installations, pipelines, platforms and shipping facilities as much as
Iran, with the support of the people of Iraq, Afghanistan and
Azerbaijan, will cut the world oil supply by one-third, which will send the
price of a barrel of the black gold to $350.
George W. Bush said he wants
a revolution. Well, here comes an earth-shattering one!
Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Support independent news DONATE