Demand that the Mideast become a nuclear-weapon-free zone!

TEHRAN, Jul. 21 (MNA) – Petty and small-minded is the sole way to describe the restrictions on Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif’s movements to a six-block area around the United Nations complex while he is in New York to address a UN group. This kind of action and mentality is the stuff of petty tyrants, not befitting the alleged leader or government of an “empire” that has any serious, responsible sense of itself or of others overseas or internally who don’t happen to be “Caucasian”. Or “Western” or whatever.

Trump stepped into a hornet’s nest when he blathered on both in front of the press and on Twitter about four ladies of color in Congress, all young Democrats, and then even while the House of Representatives in the US Congress condemned what were clearly racist comments, only four members of the House on the Republican side of the aisle joined in the condemnation. The series of Tweets aimed at the Congresswomen who hold policy positions antithetical to his own on multiple issues could only be characterized as racist.

Trump’s primary exhortation involved telling the four women -- Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley – that if they did not like Trumps views or the actions of his administration they ought to return to the countries they came from and leave the US But three of the ladies were born in the US It seems that only pure Caucasians are valid “Americans” to Trump, and one of the women is an American-born Palestinian who certainly is not welcome in the Zionist entity, Israel. Some commentators seized on the comment and claimed, jokingly, that Trump had also called for the return of millions of Palestinian refugees to Israel to their former homes, too, when he suggested that Rashida Tlaib leave the US

Anyone alive during the Vietnam War, and back then opposition to it was relatively extreme, remembers the oft stated command: “Love it (America) or leave it.” The “it” referred to Washington’s war policies under both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon with respect to Vietnam. The reference had nothing to do with the country as a whole and with its alleged tenets of democratic inclusiveness and American “ideals” of fair play and rational policies, such that these beliefs or policies existed to any degree back then.

It also has come to light that Trump likely trashed the JCPOA as well as other US endorsements such as the Paris climate accord simply because they were accords upheld and promoted by Barack Obama, a Black man, and the same goes for internal policies involving healthcare and other matters. It’s rather hard to comprehend that a fair number of Americans claim that Obama was the “best President” in their lifetimes when even Obama’s actions when he was in the White House compared to Trump’s were to date more extreme in terms of actually attacking other countries (like Libya) and supporting or sparking revolutions, as in Ukraine. No question that Obama, even if he did not live up to his alleged views, was one relatively smooth talker and a President of charming disposition compared to Trump’s abrasive and divisive postures.

One might credit Trump that he has not started yet another war in the Mideast despite the urgings of people Like Bolton and Pompeo. Perhaps the overriding factor that has held Trump back has been Iran’s clarity and consistency as well as Iran’s threats to strike back overwhelmingly around the Persian Gulf if it were attacked militarily.

But make no mistake. a Jewish female commentator in New York has written: “What has taken place over time is that a relatively small group of extremists have received moral support from right wing media outlets in recent years and those with racist proclivities have been nurtured among Trump’s “base” of voters to form a movement that is anti-democratic and pro-fascist.” What also seems to be occurring is that there is a convergence between treatment of alleged “enemies” overseas and the treatment of Americans who don’t support Trump’s policies whether internal or overseas.

Iran spokesman President Rouhani, in any event, has stated it is ready to attend negotiations with the US to defuse war tensions provided Trump returns to the JCPOA and lifts sanctions that have barred Iran from exporting its oil resources. Although Trump’s administration has also announced it is open to negotiations with Iran on a more far-reaching agreement on nuclear and security issues, the US president declared on Wednesday that sanctions on Iran might soon be increased “substantially.” This latter comment is hardly encouraging, but just more of the same arrogance.

According to diplomatic leaks from the United Kingdom mission in Washington, a former U.K. ambassador warned London that the US administration had committed an act of “diplomatic vandalism” by withdrawing from the nuclear pact, considering that behind the move last year there were ideological and personality motivations.

Here is what could possibly be a posture for Iran (that would appeal to the world) if and when negotiations ever occur again. Yes, it’s vaguely possible that if the JCPOA were resurrected it might be, after serious talks, modified somewhat without Iran being obliged to dismantle its entire nuclear program and expertise, or dismantle its defensive missile capacities.

What if, for example, Iran were to suggest again what it has suggested before and do it decisively and fully: That Iran is open to change IF or on condition that the US also pledges to work honestly towards making the entire Middle East a nuclear weapons free zone.This means, of course, that the sole country in the Mideast that actually has nuclear weapons, Israel, gives up their own weapons in the interests of regional peace. Nothing else could be more constructive for the region, but inasmuch as Trump has maintained a myopic foreign policy that has catered almost exclusively to the right-wing Zionists and Netanyahu, this may be and probably is impossible. Israel has been determined to kill any good deal with Iran, and even an Israeli NGO is suing the European Union over INSTEX, and trying to assert that Iranian assets in it, if any, ought to belong to Israel. Stealing Iranian assets in Europe based on US court rulings, as part of an effort to undermine EU attempts to save the nuclear deal with Iran, is clearly a huge problem. But the EU may well object to an attempt to impose US policy on them.

As it has been for decades, the US willingness to give the Zionists whatever they want, including the destruction of several countries in the Mideast, has been the primary fly in the ointment that could in time lead to relative peace in the region. The only thing positive here is that more and more Americans are becoming sick and tired of the Zionist control over US foreign policies and insane charges of “anti-Semitism”, despite all the mainstream media propaganda.


News Code 147906


Your Comment

You are replying to: .
  • captcha