Secretary Blinken’s January 29-31, 2023 visit to Egypt, Israel and the Palestinian Authority was another one of his milestones, well-intentioned – but erroneous – Middle East legacies. It has backfired on vital US interests, in general, and the pursuit of regional stability and peace, in particular.

Secretary Blinken in Egypt

*A major issue raised by President El-Sisi, during his meeting with Secretary Blinken, was the volcanic turbulence in Libya, which has traumatized the region since 2011, fueling Muslim Brotherhood terrorism in Egypt and overall Islamic terrorism in Africa and Europe.

*This turbulence was triggered by a US-led NATO military offensive against the Gaddafi regime, and was masterminded, largely, by key policy-makers in the Obama-Biden Administration. They included Antony Blinken, then National Security Advisor to Vice President Biden, and were led by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her close advisor and Director of Policy Planning Jake Sullivan, UN Ambassador Susan Rice and Special Assistant to President Obama Samantha Power.

*The offensive was motivated by noble values of human rights, but went astray due to an intrinsic misreading of the Middle East, in general, and Libya, in particular, where Gaddafi was not fighting innocent bystanders, but anti-US Islamic terrorists. In fact, these terrorists murdered the US Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, following their US-facilitated victory over Gaddafi.

*While the aim of the offensive was to prevent a massive slaughter of non-combatant Libyans by Gaddafi, the outcome of the offensive has doomed Libya to decades of chaos, plagued by an ongoing slaughter house, which has dwarfed the worst casualty assessments made by Clinton and Blinken.

*The ill-advised offensive has transformed Libya – the soft underbelly of Europe – into one of the world’s largest platforms of anti-Western Islamic terrorists, drugs and arms traffickers.  It energized a global resurgence of Islamic terrorism, and became a home base for scores of terrorist militias and an arena of civil wars with the participation of Turkey, Qatar, Italy, Russia, Egypt, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and France.

*Secretary Blinken’s well-intentioned, but misguided, human rights-driven policy has ignored the only choice facing the US in the Middle East, where human rights have not been complied by Arab regimes: a choice between pro-US human rights violating Arab regimes, or anti-US human rights violating Arab regimes.

*The refusal to accept that reality has also led to US military, financial and diplomatic pressure on the pro-US President Sisi – as well as the pro-US Saudi Crown Prince MBS and the pro-US UAE Crown Prince MBZ – to desist from the rough-handling of Muslim Brotherhood terrorists and the Iran-supported Houthi Yemenite terrorists, which the State Department establishment considers legitimate political, religious and social entities.

*This US policy – highlighted by the eagerness to conclude another accord with Iran’s Ayatollahs, who threaten the survival of every pro-US Arab Sunni regime – has pushed Egypt, Saudi Arabia. the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain closer to China and Russia.

Secretary Blinken in Israel and the Palestinian Authority

*As frustrated as Secretary Blinken is with the rogue conduct of Iran’s Ayatollahs, and notwithstanding the recently expanded US-Israel military drills, Blinken still opposes Israel’s determination that the 43-year-old diplomatic option has dramatically failed, while significantly bolstering the Ayatollahs anti-US global rogue strategy in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.

*Blinken rejects the Israeli suggestion (shared by all pro-US Arab regimes) that a credible threat to resort to regime-change and military options is the only way to abort the regional and global terroristic, conventional, ballistic and nuclear Ayatollah threats. He still assumes that the apocalyptic Ayatollahs could be induced – via a generous financial and diplomatic package – into good faith negotiation, peaceful-coexistence and to abandon their 1,400-year-old fanatic, religious and megalomaniacal vision.

*Blinken’s policy toward Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood – which pose a lethal threat to all Sunni Arab regimes – has eroded the US strategic credibility in pro-US Arab capitals, and has pushed Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain – reluctantly – closer to China and Russia, militarily and commercially.

*According to the State Department spokesperson: “The Secretary will underscore the urgent need for the parties [Israel and the Palestinians] to take steps to deescalate tensions… [and] put an end to the cycle of violence that has claimed too many innocent lives….”

*Once again, Secretary Blinken resorts to the immoral moral-equivalence, failing to distinguish between PA-incited Palestinian terrorists (killed by Israel) and Israeli civilians (murdered by Palestinian terrorists). Inadvertently, moral equivalence energizes Palestinian terrorism, while aiming to constrain Israel’s counter-terrorist efforts.

*Secretary Blinken’s visit to Ramallah enhanced legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority, while the latter has enshrined, since 1993, K-12 hate-education, which has brainwashed Palestinian youth against the existence of the “infidel” Jewish State. This rogue education system has been the most authentic reflection of the Palestinian vision/aspiration – consistent with the 1959 and 1964 charters of Fatah and the PLO, which focus on the annihilation of the pre-1967 “Zionist entity.”  The PA education system has become the most effective hot house and production-line of terrorists and suicide-bombers.

*Blinken has accorded more weight to Palestinian diplomatic–talk than to the Palestinian hate-walk and its induced terrorism.  He has ignored the fact that a prerequisite to meaningful negotiation and peace is the uprooting of hate-education, mosque incitement, generous monthly allowances to terrorists’ families, and the glorification of terrorists through public monuments, schools and other institutions.

*Secretary Blinken attempts to convince Israel that the establishment of a Palestinian state is a prerequisite for bolstering Middle East stability and concluding an Israel-Saudi Arabia peace treaty. However, such a proposal should be assessed against the backdrop of the systematic failure of all State Department’s proposals to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict.  They failed because they ignored the Palestinian track record, the non-central role of the Palestinian issue in the Middle East, and due to the preoccupation with the Palestinian issue, which yielded a Palestinian veto power.

*In fact, Israel’s peace treaties with Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and the Sudan were successfully concluded by bypassing the Palestinian issue, and focusing on Arab – not Palestinian – interests, which are increasingly served by enhanced defense and commercial cooperation with Israel. Arabs do not cut off their noses to spite their faces.

*Blinken ignores Middle East reality, which highlights the non-centrality of the Palestinian issue (no Arab-Israel war has erupted due to the Palestinian issue) and Arab order of priorities (no Arab country has flexed its military – and hardly its financial – muscle on behalf of the Palestinians), unless one assumes that the Palestinian-embracing Arab talk supersedes the indifferent/negative Arab walk.

*Unlike Secretary Blinken, the pro-US Arab Sunni regimes are aware of the despotic, corrupt and terroristic nature of the Palestinian Authority, and the rogue nature of the proposed Palestinian state, as evidenced by the Palestinian intra-Arab track record.  Arabs perceive the Palestinians as an intra-Arab role model of subversion, terrorism, treachery and ingratitude, who bite the hands that feed them (Egypt – in the 1950s, Syria – 1960s, Jordan – 1968-1970, Lebanon – 1970-1982 and Kuwait – in 1990).

*The Arabs are also aware of the systematic Palestinian collaboration with anti-Western rogue entities, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Iran’s Ayatollahs, Saddam Hussein, Latin American and other international terrorist organizations, Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and North Korea.

*The bottom line is that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the river, transforming Jordan into another platform of Islamic terrorism (just like Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen), and triggering a domino scenario into the Arabian Peninsula.  It would topple the pro-US Arab oil-producing regimes, undermine regional and global stability and economy and erode the US economy and geo-strategic posture, while advancing the fortunes of Russia, China, Iran’s Ayatollahs and anti-US Islamic Sunni terrorism.

Support Appreciated

The US-engineered and guaranteed Israel-Lebanon maritime/gas accord is supposed to follow in the footsteps of the Israel-Arab peace treaties with Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco, reducing regional terrorism and instability, inducing moderation and enhancing US interests.  Does it?

Hezbollah and Lebanon

*The Shiite Hezbollah – Iran’s proxy and globally recognized terrorist organization – is a dominant player in the increasingly imploding, failed-state, Lebanon, politically, militarily, socially, educationally, religiously and journalistically.

Hezbollah has dramatically bolstered its capabilities and clout since its establishment in 1982 – by Iran’s Shiite Ayatollahs – as a vehicle to export the Shiite Islamic Revolution, extend the Ayatollahs’ reach from the Persian Gulf, through Iraq, Syria and Lebanon to the eastern Mediterranean, and undermine the US strategic posture in the Middle East.  Hezbollah has collaborated with Iran’s Ayatollahs in the Middle East, West Africa and throughout Latin America, all the way to the US-Mexico border. It has gained substantial sway due to its major contribution to the survival of the Assad regime.  Hezbollah has benefited from the Ayatollahs’ financial support, combat training, and the supply of precise missiles and predator unmanned aerial vehicles.

*Hezbollah’s dominant role in Lebanon’s decision-making has led the pro-US Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain to ostracize Lebanon and suspend financial aid to Beirut, lest it bolsters Hezbollah’s stature.

Israel’s maritime accord vs. Israel-Arab peace treaties

*Israel’s peace treaties with the relatively-stable, pro-US, anti-Iran and anti-terrorist Sunni Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco, with the blessing of Saudi Arabia, which generated a critical impetus to the Abraham Accords. Their policy and vision do not extend beyond their own national boundaries.

On the other hand, the maritime/gas accord was concluded with the uncontrollable Lebanon, which is afflicted by intrinsic religious, ethnic and political fragmentation, that has been leveraged by the violently domineering, anti-US, pro-Iran Hezbollah, a major arm of Islamic terrorism in the Middle East, west Africa and Latin America. Hezbollah is dedicated to advancing the fanatic vision of a universal Shiite Moslem society, through the exportation of the Ayatollahs’ Shiite Islamic Revolution, toppling all Sunni (“apostate” and “heretic”) Sunni regimes, transforming the Republic of Lebanon into the Islamic Republic of Lebanon, a province of a universal Shiite Islamic entity, and bringing the “infidel” West (especially “the Great American Satan) to submission.

*The Abraham Accords were signed with regimes, which have accepted peaceful-coexistence with Israel and are focused on domestic stability, including economic growth.

Nonetheless, the maritime/gas accord was concluded with a country, dominated by Hezbollah, which perceives peaceful-coexistence with the Jewish state and its Sunni Arab neighbors an anathema to its fanatic vision, and has made it clear – since establishment – that its ideology supersedes financial and diplomatic benefits.

The conventional Western wisdom that Hezbollah will choose economic benefits over ideology should be assessed against the backdrop of the track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs and their adherence to their core ideology irrespective of the mega-billion-dollars of Western gifts, showered upon them by the US and the West since 1979. In addition, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have exhibited faithfulness to hate-education, incitement and terrorism, notwithstanding the unprecedented geographic, diplomatic and financial concessions made by Israel, the US and the world at-large.

*The Abraham Accords were concluded with Arab regimes, which consider Israel as a most effective military and technological ally in the face of lethal threats and in their pursuit of economic diversification.

While these Arab regimes are not fully-reconciled to the existence of an “infidel” Jewish sovereignty in the “abode of Islam” (the Middle East), they do not consider it a top priority, realizing the potential Israeli contribution to their survival. Moreover, some of them (especially the UAE) are moderating their education curriculum and policy toward Israel, rethinking Islam’s fundamental view of the Jewish people and the Jewish State.

On the other hand, Hezbollah and their masters in Tehran, consider Israel as a loathsome entity, religiously and strategically, to be uprooted, in order to advance their fanatic, religious, megalomaniacal vision.

They recognize the Jewish State as the most effective beachhead of “The Great American Satan,” culturally and strategically, and a powerful ally of the “apostate” Sunni Arab regimes.

*All Israel-Arab peace treaties resulted from a deep appreciation, by the Arab partners, of Israel’s military, technological and diplomatic capabilities, including its military defiance of Iran and Hezbollah, and its ability to fend off US pressure, which have demonstrated Israel’s willingness to assume short-term setbacks, in order to benefit from long-term national security benefits. The pro-US Arab regimes consider Israel’s posture of deterrence as a key component of their own national security.

On the other hand, the maritime/gas accord, was brokered by the US under the assumption that an Israeli giveaway of the entire area in dispute (330 square miles of economic water and 10 square kilometers of sovereign water) would avert a Hezbollah threat to launch an attack of missiles and predator unmanned vehicles.  In other words, a sweeping capitulation, rather than confrontation and preemption of a terrorist threat.

*The maritime/gas accord – which reflects the State Department worldview that concessions made to terrorists could induce moderation – has eroded Israel’s posture of deterrence, which has transformed Israel (since 1967) into the most productive force-multiplier for the US, and a desirable ally of the pro-US Arab regimes, in the face of lethal threats.

The bottom line

*The US architects of the maritime/gas accord and their Israeli partners overlook the fact that terrorists bite the hands that feed them. For example, the Mujahideen defeated the Soviets in Afghanistan due to US support, and were quick to launch a major terror offensive against the US in the Middle East and in the US itself. Furthermore, Iran’s Ayatollahs seized power in Iran due to US support, and then became the lead epicenter of global anti-US terrorism. Moreover, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas responded to unprecedented Israeli gestures in 1993 (the Oslo Accord) and 2005 (the disengagement from Gaza) with unprecedented hate-education, incitement and terrorism.

*The US architects and their Israeli partners have ignored the fact that concessions to terrorists – just like any other rogue entity – whets their appetite and intensifies terrorism.

*The maritime/gas accord represents a victory of Western conventional wisdom over Middle East reality, sacrificing long-term national security on the altar of short-term gratification, which plays into the hands of rogue entities (e.g., Iran’s Ayatollahs, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority), undermining the homeland and national security of Western democracies (e.g., the US, Europe and Israel).

*At a time, when most Iranians, and especially Iranian women, are rising against the repressive regime of the Ayatollahs, demanding regime-change, the US-engineered maritime/gas accord bolsters the Ayatollahs’ geo-strategic posture, while repeating the critically erroneous policy of 2009, when the US ignored the popular uprising in Iran, allowing the Ayatollahs to butcher its unarmed citizens.

*The US-engineered maritime/gas accord provides a tailwind to the Ayatollahs and their Hezbollah proxy, while ruling out active support of the regime-change movement in Iran; waiving an essential US military option (which is the only way to test the Ayatollahs’ intentions); sustaining the self-destructive diplomatic option (which has bolstered the Ayatollahs’ fortunes since their ascension to power in February 1979); assuming that the Ayatollahs are potentially good-faith negotiators; and viewing the Ayatollahs as if they were amenable to peaceful-coexistence, abandoning their 1,400-year-old fanatic, imperialistic vision, in return for another financial and diplomatic bonanza, which is currently offered – by the US – to Tehran.

*Against the backdrop of the aforementioned data, the US-engineered maritime/gas accord, is an extension of the well-intentioned US policy in the Middle East, which has been at odds with Middle East reality, intensifying regional terrorism and instability and eroding US posture and interests.

Support Appreciated

*Is the diplomatic option viable when dealing with Iran’s Ayatollahs, who have promoted – since 1979 – child martyrdom in their school curriculum and on the battlefield?!

*Is the diplomatic option viable when dealing with Iran’s Ayatollahs, who have espoused child martyrdom in the service of their Islamic Revolution, which aims to topple all pro-US Arab Sunni regimes and bring “the Great American Satan” and other Western “infidels” to submission?!

*Is the diplomatic option viable when dealing with Iran’s Ayatollahs, who have urged Iranian children to participate in the annual November 13 “National Day of Fighting Arrogance” (commemorating the takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran and holding over 50 Americans hostages for 444 days), declaring their hatred toward “the bullying and oppressive USA” and chanting “Death to America”?!

Luring children into mine-sweeping

Brainwashing children into martyrdom is presented by the Ayatollahs as an extension of the Shiite mythology surrounding the 680 AD Battle of Karbala, which was the Big Bang of the Sunni-Shiite conflict and the role model for martyrdom. During the battle, Hussain ibn Ali, the third Shia Imam and the grandson of Muhammad, and his warriors – including children – were betrayed and massacred by the Sunni Caliph Yazid.

“During the 1980-1988 Iraq-Iran war, children were sent to be slaughtered on mine-sweeping missions…. Iranian officials forced underage Afghan refugees to fight in the Syrian civil war on the side of Bashar al-Assad’s government….”

According to the Geneva-based Refworld (an arm of the UN High Commissioner on Refugees), “[Iranian] child soldiers, some as young as nine, were used extensively during the Iran-Iraq war…. They were given ‘keys to paradise’ and promised that they would go directly to heaven if they died as martyrs against the Iraqi enemy….

“An Iranian government representative admitted in a closed-door sub-commission hearing that children did participate in the war against Iraq…. In a series of rulings issued in the autumn of 1982, Ayatollah Khomeini declared that parental permission was unnecessary for those going to the front…. Iranian officers captured by the Iraqis claimed that nine out of ten Iranian child soldiers were killed…. Boys as young as nine were reportedly used in human wave attacks and to serve as mine sweepers in the war with Iraq…. Martyrs’ families enjoyed some social prestige and reportedly received monetary compensation per child, plus a martyr’s card entitling the family to food and other privileges. Child soldiers were nearly all from poor villages or slum families….”

Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty reported that “during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, when self-sacrifice and martyrdom became the quintessential values of the Islamic Revolution and the guiding principles of Iranian society, more than 550,000 [elementary and high school] students were sent to the front, often with a plastic ‘key to paradise’ hanging around their necks…. They were used as cannon fodder in human-wave attacks launched by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps against the Iraqi forces.  October 30 is celebrated as Student Basij (paramilitary unites] Day, in order to promote and glorify the spirit of martyrdom….

“Iran’s Welfare and Social Security Minister, Sadeq Mahsouli, said that ‘children should be educated in such a way that when they reach the age of 13, they will be able to imitate Hossein Fahmideh [commit martyrdom].'”

The New York Times’ Terence Smith reported on “the 12-17 year old ‘Warriors of God’, joining Iran’s battle against Iraq, wearing blood-red headbands and a small metal key to heaven, if killed in the holy war against Iraq. They were divinely designated martyrs who stormed barbed wire or marched into Iraqi mine fields in the face of withering machine-gun fire to clear the way for Iranian tanks.

“The young boys were recruited by local clergy or simply rounded up in the villages of Iran, given an intensive indoctrination in the Shiite tradition of martyrdom, and then sent into battle against Iraqi armor. Often bound together in groups of 20 by ropes to prevent the fainthearted from deserting, they hurl themselves on barbed wire, or march into Iraqi mine fields in the face of withering machine-gun fire to clear the way for Iranian tanks.  Across the back of their khaki-colored shirts is stenciled the slogan: ‘I have the special permission of the Imam to enter heaven.’

“Iran seems a society possessed. Its soldiers at the front and its clerical leaders at home display a kind of zealotry in pursuit of their revolution that is hard for the Western mind to comprehend….”

According to IMPACT SE 2021-2022 study of Iran’s school curriculum: “….Child martyrdom is glorified…. Martyrdom is viewed as a goal to be pursued in order to achieve spiritual perfection….”

The bottom line

*Since February 1979 – when the Ayatollahs assumed power in Iran – the diplomatic option has been a moral failure, rewarding a regime, which has brainwashed children into martyrdom, in addition to repressing the ethnic and religious minorities of Iran.

*Since February 1979, the diplomatic option has been a strategic failure, energizing a regime, which has evolved into the regional and global epicenter of anti-US subversion, terrorism and dissemination of advanced military systems throughout the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.

*The US’ diplomatic option and moral values, on the one hand, and Iran’s child martyrdom and domestic and foreign policy, on the other hand, are dramatically incompatible.

*The 43-year-old track record of the diplomatic option attests to its resounding failure and the need to shift to another option, which will free the Iranian people, the Middle East and the globe of the wrath of the Ayatollahs.

Support Appreciated

*“Iran is fighting a global war and calls on oppressed Muslims and non-Muslims to unite under Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran to overthrow the evil regimes [the “infidel” West led by the US and the “heretic” Sunni regimes]. The Islamic Revolution knows no borders [hence, the right of Iran to interfere in many conflicts in the Middle East and beyond]; it applies to the whole world (Literature and Humanities, Grade 12, 2021‒2022, page 110).

School curriculum reflects ideology

The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs is consistent with their constitution, domestic repression of ethnic and religious minorities, the subjugation of women, and the proliferation of anti-US terrorism in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. It provides a roadmap for an apocalyptic commitment to a global, anti-US Islamic revolution.

While US and Western policy makers rely heavily on statements and commitments made by Iran’s Ayatollahs in the negotiation rooms and in the public arena, the Ayatollahs’ school curriculum reflects most authentically their fanatic, religious and megalomaniacal anti-US strategy, tactics and vision: toppling the Sunni “apostate and heretic” regimes and bringing the Western “infidel” (especially “The Great American Satan”) to submission.

Moreover, Iran’s Ayatollahs have mastered the art of the Quran-sanctioned Taqiyya: dissimulation, doubletalk and deception-based statements and agreements, aimed at shielding the “believers” from the “infidels,” to be abrogated once conditions are ripe.

Furthermore, the school curriculum of the Ayatollahs has become an effective production-line for terrorists and suicide bombers.

Since February 1, 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini toppled the Shah of Iran, the US has persisted with the diplomatic option – cushioned by a financial bonanza – in attempts to entice Iran’s Ayatollahs to abandon their global exportation of the Islamic Shiite Revolution and accept peaceful coexistence with their Arab Sunni neighbors (e.g., Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain) along with human rights, democracy and good-faith negotiation.

As evidenced by the Ayatollahs’ 43 year track record, the diplomatic option has been shattered, providing a robust tailwind for the Ayatollahs – in the Persian Gulf, the Middle East at-large, Africa and increasingly in Latin America  – and a self-destructive head wind to all pro-US Arab regimes and the US’ homeland and national security.

Iran’s 2021-2022 anti-US school curriculum

*Prof. Eldad Pardo, a Hebrew University Expert on Iran, Islam and the Middle East and the Research Director of The Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education, has researched Iran’s school curriculum since 2011. The following are some of the findings of his 2021-2022 study:

“…. Jihad [Holy War] and martyrdom have remained of central importance…. Child martyrdom is glorified [about 50,000 Iranian children were killed during the 1980-1987 Iran-Iraq war, many of them as mine sweepers]….  Martyrdom is viewed as a goal to be pursued in order to achieve spiritual perfection…. Iran largely continues to educate students for the prospect of a global war, and the spreading of the Islamist-Khomeinist revolution. There is a greater focus on Iran’s desire to export its global Islamic Revolution to the Arab Middle East compared to past curricula, with students encouraged to engage in militant activity to achieve Iranian hegemony. Textbooks instill a military spirit in students by glorifying the activities of the Quds Force, one of the five branches of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), focusing on their operations abroad….

“…. Martyrdom remains a central theme across the curriculum, as does virulent anti-Israel and antisemitic rhetoric, and hostility toward Western powers….

“…. Whereas previous reports showed a theological and mystical dimension to revolutionary war, the 2022 review found that textbooks are focused more on reality, namely on the tangible socio-economic benefits of expansionist foreign policy for Iran…. The Iranian curriculum continues to teach inflammatory content, with a degree of radicalization markedly worse than in previous reports. Unrelenting expansionism, hatred of foreigners and the ‘Other,’ Islamist and radical messaging, glorification of violence and martyrdom, imposition of central government ideology, suppression of local cultures, and opposing worldviews remain central pillars of the Iranian curriculum….

“…. [Students] are encouraged to support Arab proxy militias in the pursuit of fomenting regional instability. This message is reinforced by specific examples of martyrs – Quds Force members, Arab and other non-Iranian militia leaders – who were killed by opposition groups inspired by the US and Israel to counter the regime’s expansionist aspirations…. Students are encouraged to partner with radical Sunni groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood….

“Students are taught that Iranian hegemony in the Arab Middle East will benefit Iran through economic influence – namely, controlling much of the world’s energy supply and maritime trade….”

Iranian school textbooks – examples

*Since the November 1979 takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran – which entailed holding of over 50 US hostages for 444 days – “The National Day of Fighting Arrogance [the USA]” is commemorated annually on November 13^th, when the public, especially pupils and students, declaring their hatred toward “the bullying and oppressive USA” and chanting “Death to America.” “This disavowal and declaration of disgust yields unity and homogeneity, bolstering resistance of the enemy” (Islamic Education, Grade 6, 2021‒2022, page 33; Defense Readiness, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 31).

*The US is described as a Satanic enemy of Islam and the Ayatollahs’ Islamic Revolution (Defense Readiness, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 30).

*The US and Britain are blamed for the proliferation of drugs among Muslims and driving a wedge among Muslims (Islamic Education and Training, Grade 8, 2021‒2022, page 16).

*Since 1979, the US has been devoted to a “satanic scheme” to enslave Islam (Defense Readiness, Grade 10, 2021‒22, page 120).

*Enemies [e.g., the US] must be defeated and humiliated, as demonstrated in Iran’s history (Qur’an Learning, Grade 2, 2021‒22, page 67; Persian Language, Grade 5, 2021‒22, page 60).  US sailors captured by the Iranian navy on January 12, 2016, are depicted in a humiliating position (Social Studies, Grade 8, 2021‒2022, page 130).

*Martyrdom and Jihad (Holy War) are promoted by heralding the hundreds of thousands, who sacrificed their lives during the 1980-1988 Iraq-Iran war (Islamic Education and Training, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 134).

*Whoever rises to the cause of Jihad [Holy War] against the enemies by the command of God is always victorious” (Islamic Education and Training, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 135).

The bottom line

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs is the most accurate reflection of their fanatic and megalomaniacal vision.

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs has represented – since February 1, 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini landed in Tehran, taking over control of Iran – the fundamentals of their rogue policy-making, domestically, regionally and globally.

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs, on the one hand, and the assumption that Iran’s Ayatollahs are amenable to negotiation, constitute an oxymoron.

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs, on the one hand, and US values and interests, on the other hand, constitute a classic contradiction in terms.

*Downplaying the centrality of Iran’s school curriculum in the shaping of the Ayatollahs’ foreign and national security policy adds fuel to the Middle East and global fire, while causing a severe setback to US’ homeland and national security interests.

*A major goal of President Biden’s July, 2022 visit to the Middle East – in addition to increasing the Saudi and Emirati oil production – is the restoration of the US stature as a reliable strategic ally of the pro-US Arab regimes, and stop their drift toward Russia and China.

*At the same time, Biden pursues a JCPOA-like agreement with Iran’s Ayatollahs and embraces the Muslim Brotherhood.

*However, the attempt to restore the US’ strategic reliability, while aiming for a JCPOA-like accord with Iran’s Ayatollahs and embracing the Muslim Brotherhood, constitutes a contradiction in terms, since all pro-US Arab regimes view Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood as lethal threats. Moreover, they are convinced that a JCPOA-like accord would bolster (as did the 2015 JCPOA) the Ayatollahs’ regional and global subversion, terrorism, fueling of civil wars, drug trafficking, money laundering and the proliferation of advanced military systems to rogue entities in the Middle East and beyond. They are also frustrated by the State Department’s underestimation of the fanatic vision of the Muslim Brotherhood, and taking lightly its terror network throughout the Middle East and beyond (e.g., India and Thailand).

*Contrary to President Biden and the State Department establishment, the pro-US Arab regimes are fully aware that Iran’s Ayatollahs are not amenable to peaceful coexistence with their Arab Sunni neighbors; neither to abandoning their fanatic, religious, imperialistic vision in return for a financial and diplomatic bonanza; nor to compliance with agreements.  They have concluded that the rogue 43-year-old track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs – since rising to power in February 1979 – is irreconcilable with good-faith negotiation.

*The visit may awaken Biden and Secretary of State Blinken – who have prodded Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt on account of human rights and their involvement in the Iran-fueled civil war in Yemen – to Middle East reality.  The visit may alert them to the fact that the choice facing the US is not between Arab countries, which respect or violate human rights, but between pro-US and anti-US Arab countries, which violate human rights.

*President Biden’s visit will reaffirm the return of the State Department – since January 2021 – to the center stage of US foreign policy-making, as it was until January 2017, notwithstanding Foggy Bottom’s systematic blunders in the Middle East.

*For example, the State Department opposed the Abraham Accords, which were forged in defiance of its (Palestinian-centered) Middle East perspective. Thus, the Abraham Accords were concluded because their architects recognized the secondary role of the Palestinian issue in the Middle East. Therefore, they did not focus on the Palestinian issue, but on Arab national security and economic interests, in the face of lethal Iranian and Muslim Brotherhood threats, and the need to diversify/modernize the economy of the oil-producing countries.

*The Abraham Accords – similar to Israel’s prior peace accords with Egypt and Jordan and consistent with intra-Arab priorities – bypassed the Palestinian issue, and therefore, avoided a Palestinian veto. On the other hand, the State Department establishment has ignored the wide gap between the Arab (supportive) talk and (harsh) walk on the Palestinian issue.  Therefore, it has misconstrued the Palestinian issue as the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict, a core cause of Middle East turbulence and a crown-jewel of Arab policy-makers. Therefore, all State Department Israel-Arab peace proposals have failed, wrecked on the rocks of Middle East reality.

*Hence, the attempt to expand the scope of the Israel-Arab peace process, on the one hand, and the State Department’s preoccupation with the Palestinian issue, on the other hand, constitute a thundering oxymoron.

*When assessing the validity of State Department proposals, which may be submitted during President Biden’s visit, Israel should study additional examples of critical State Department blunders, such as its early embrace of Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, Yasser Arafat and Bashar Assad, as well as Foggy Bottom’s reference to the eruption of the 2010-2011 turbulence/Tsunami on the Arab Street (which is still raging) as “Youth and Facebook Revolution” and “the Arab Spring.”  In addition, in 1948, the State Department ferociously opposed the establishment of the Jewish State, which it expected to be pro-Soviet, too weak to withstand Arab military offensive, undermining US national security interests and a burden for the US.  In 1981 and 2007 the State Department brutally attempted to stop, and then condemned, Israel’s bombing of Iraq’s and Syria’s nuclear reactors, which spared the US, the Middle East and the world at-large much devastation.

*President Biden may attempt to impose upon Israel a quid-pro-quo – consistent with the State Department’s “Palestine Firsters” – requiring Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, in return for enhanced strategic cooperation with Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries (which regard Palestinians as a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and ingratitude).

*President Biden and Secretary Blinken should be reminded that concessions to rogue entities whet their appetite and intensifies terrorism, as documented by the unprecedented waves of Palestinian terrorism following Israel’s dramatic concessions in 1993 (Oslo Accord) and 2005 (disengagement from the Gaza Strip). Furthermore, Egypt (1950s), Syria (1966), Jordan (1970), Lebanon (1970s) and Kuwait (1990) made major civic and financial concessions to the Palestinians, which resulted in Palestinian terrorism against their Arab hosts, including civil wars in Jordan and Lebanon and Palestinian participation in Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

*President Biden will try to convince Israel to concede the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and allow the establishment of a Palestinian state.  President Biden should be advised that based on the Palestinian rogue track record, a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River. It would be replaced by a radical, anti-US regime, triggering an anti-US ripple effect into the Arabian Peninsula, toppling pro-US Arab regimes, transferring the supply of Persian Gulf oil to anti-US entities, and bolstering the geo-strategic stature of Iran’s Ayatollahs, Russia and China at the expense of dire US interests.

Israeli control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria deters rogue entities and advances US interests; the proposed Palestinian state would radicalize the region, undermining US interests.

*Israel will be asked to authorize a US Consulate in Jerusalem, acting as the US Embassy to the Palestinian Authority. Such a demand would be in violation of the US 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act, which defines Jerusalem as the undivided and exclusive capital of Israel. It would be interpreted – regionally and globally – as succumbing to Arab/Muslim pressure, thus further eroding the US posture of deterrence.

*When considering President Biden’s demands for Israeli concessions, Israel’s Prime Minister Lapid should study the conduct of previous Israeli Prime Ministers, who fended off US Presidential pressure, experienced a short-term setback in the US-Israel relationship, but gained in long-term US strategic respect for defiance of odds and adherence to a principle-driven stance.

*While expressing much respect to President Biden and Secretary Blinken and their demands, Israeli leaders should realize that the US democracy features Congress as a co-equal, co-determining branch of government, the most authentic representative of the American people, the most powerful legislature in the world, which has the power to both propose and dispose in the areas of foreign and defense policies, and has expressed its deep reservations with regard to US policy on Iran (e.g., Democratic Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Robert Menendez’ February 2022 floor speech). While most US Presidents have pressured Israel, Congress has been a systematic supporter of enhancing the mutually-beneficial US-Israel strategic and commercial cooperation.

Support Appreciated

.

(More data available here and here)

Iran’s Ayatollahs – a clear and present danger to the US

The Saudi ArabNews reported that “the presence of Hezbollah and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Latin America is considered important by Iran, since it provides a base from which it could strike against American targets…  Iran has infiltrated not only Argentina, but also Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Guyana, Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, Suriname and Colombia…. In Foz do Iguacu, Brazil there is the largest Muslim community in the Argentina-Paraguay-Brazil Tri Border Area. Iran is able to infiltrate and manipulate that community…. Iran’s agents are potentially able to enter the US through legitimate border crossings, or among convoys of illegal immigrants….. Meanwhile Hezbollah continues its efforts to expand its terrorist activities [in Latin America]….

“[The Iranian proxy] Houthi militants transport weapons from Brazil to Yemen….  Hezbollah is involved in the illegal arms trade in Brazil, maintaining contacts with Brazil’s PCC (the most powerful criminal organization in Latin America)…. Brazil’s Forjas Taurus, the largest arms manufacturer in Latin America, is involved in sales of weapons to [pro-Iran] Yemeni arms dealer….”

According to the British E-International Relations, “Iran may well be the most important, and at the same time the most complex and the most volatile, of all the foreign policy problems with which the US must deal…. Iran continues to infiltrate [the US’] backyard….

“Iran’s foreign policy toward Latin America can be seen not only as antagonistic toward the U.S. and its national security interests. It fulfills Iran’s attempt to establish a greater presence in the US’ own backyard….

“Iran’s Latin American partners are part of the so-called ‘Pink Tide’ that came to power between the years of 1998 and 2009…. Despite the fact that the “Pink Tide” did not have a clear-cut ideology, they were united in opposition to Washington….”

Iran’s Ayatollahs leverage the “Pink Tide” to hit the US

The “Pink Tide” has been a left-leaning, pro-Iran wave among Latin American countries, moving away from the US. Some are anti-US. Recently, it has gained momentum in Mexico (2018), Argentina (2019), Bolivia (2020), Chile, Honduras and Peru (2021) and Colombia (2022), joining Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Ecuador and Bolivia, which have been anti-US and strategically-aligned with Iran. Argentina has leaned leftward, while former pro-Iran Brazilian President, Lula da Silva, is comfortably leading the polls for the October, 2022 presidential election.

On May 29, 2022, the first-ever left-leaning, pro-Iran and pro-Venezuela President (Gustavo Petro) was elected in Colombia – the third most populous Latin American country – which was the closest ally of the US in the battle against drug cartels, terror organizations and Venezuela anti-US conduct.

Florida International University’s Western Hemisphere Security Analysis Center reported that Iran’s Ayatollahs have bolstered their ties with Latin American countries, which are endowed with nuclear weapon-related natural resources, such as the significant uranium deposits in Guyana along the border with Venezuela.  A 2010 Guyana-Iran accord includes initiatives to map Guyana’s mineral resources, mostly uranium.

E-International Relations adds that “Venezuela helps Iran develop nuclear technology, obtain uranium, evade UN sanctions, smuggle arms and munitions and carry out a host of other shadowy deals…. Bolivia and Iran have signed a series of cooperation agreements, making Iran a partner in the mining and exploitation of Bolivia’s lithium, a key strategic mineral with application for nuclear weapons [and ballistic] development…. Iran appears to be eyeing Ecuador’s uranium deposits…. Iran has supported terrorist organizations operating in Latin America, such as [the Shiite] Hezbollah and the Sunni Hamas. Both have been operating in the Tri-Border Area, featuring Ciudad del Este in Paraguay, Puerto Iguazu in Argentina, and Foz do Iguaçu in Brazil…. Iran is developing its own cyber security capabilities with the intent to use them to launch [anti-US] Denial of Service (DoS) attacks, launching attacks of malicious code, electronic warfare, debilitation of communications and advanced exploitation [hostile] techniques. In fact, most DoS attacks are carried out in conjunction with transnational organized crime organizations for the purpose of extortion. The Iranian government is investing heavily in cyber capabilities and may well turn to their proxies (the Bolivarian Revolution nations) as an [anti-US] force multiplier….”

According to the UK-based IranWire, Iran’s close ties with Peru reflect Tehran’s awareness that Peru sits on uranium reserves, and is located at the Chile-Peru-Bolivia Tri-Border-Area, which has been lawless for decades, and has therefore attracted terror organizations, drug and human traffickers, money launderers and arms dealers.

“As in Venezuela and Bolivia, there exists a convergence in Peru between Iranian cells and longer-standing revolutionary socialist groups – a fertile ground for proselytization to Shiite Islam.  Therefore, in 2012, the Ayatollahs and Hezbollah established in Peru the Islamic Center of Peru, Inkarri Islam, which has served as an intelligence, recruitment, indoctrination and proselytization center. The leader of the center has been Edwar Husain Quiroga Vargas, a Shiite Muslim convert, who is one of Peru’s President Pedro Castillo’s closest activists.

Iran’s Al Mustafa International University, a religious seminar based in Iran’s city of Qom that opened its doors in 2007 with the specific mission of proselytizing the non-Shiite, non-Muslim world and catering to converts in their native language…. Al Mustafa is one of Iran’s main vectors to export its revolutionary brand of Shiite Islam.

The bottom line

*Since February 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini seized control of Iran, the US has employed the diplomatic/negotiation option in its dealings with the Islamic Republic of Iran, waiving the regime-change and military options.

*Since February 1979, Iran’s Ayatollahs have leveraged the diplomatic option, dramatically intensifying their anti-US activities in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America all the way to the US-Mexico border.

*Since February 1979, Iran’s Ayatollahs have viewed Latin America – the soft underbelly of the US – as a top priority, bolstering strategic cooperation with all anti-US governments, leading drug cartels, money launderers and terror organizations

*Since February 1979, the diplomatic option has yielded to the Ayatollahs billions of dollars, which have bolstered Iran as an epicenter of global anti-US subversion, terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and proliferation of ballistic missiles and other lethal systems.

*While the US has approached Tehran diplomatically, the Ayatollahs have re-entrenched their lethal presence at the backyard of the US.

*As expected when dealing with a rogue, apocalyptic and anti-US regime – which is driven by a 1,400 year old fanatic vision to bring the “apostate” Sunnis and the “infidel” West to submission – the diplomatic/negotiation option has advanced the fortunes of Iran’s Ayatollahs, while severely undermining the national and homeland security of the US.

*The enhancement of US interests is preconditioned upon the triumph of reality-driven Iran policy over wishful-thinking, which requires the suspension of the self-destruct diplomatic option, while featuring  credible regime-change and military options.

Support Appreciated

(More on Iran)

Iran’s Constitution – the roadmap of Iran’s global strategy

*The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran lays the foundation of the systematic, rogue, fanatic, domestic, regional and global conduct of Iran’s apocalyptic Ayatollahs since assuming power in February 1979.

*The Ayatollahs’ Constitution provides a roadmap for the exportation of the Islamic Revolution by utilizing subversion, terrorism, civil wars, the proliferation of ballistic technologies, drug trafficking and proselytization.

*The Ayatollahs’ Constitution aspires for the triumph of the oppressed “mustadafun” (e.g., Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua) over the oppressive and arrogant “mustakbirun” (e.g., “The Great American Satan,” Saudi Arabia, Israel).

*The strategic goal of the Ayatollahs’ Constitution is to establish a universal Shiite society, based on the teachings of Ayatollah Khomeini, and bring to submission the Sunni Moslem “apostates” and the non-Moslem “infidels.”

*According to the Ayatollahs’ Constitution, the Islamic Republic’s armed forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) are responsible for the safeguarding of Iran’s frontiers, as well as the fulfillment of the mission of Jihad (Holy War), striking fear into the hearts of the enemies of Allah, and extending the supremacy of Shiite Islam throughout the entire world.

*The Ayatollahs’ Constitution considers the 1979 Islamic Revolution – and the 1978 toppling of the pro-US Shah of Iran – as a crushing victory over despotism and the US, a prelude to global Shiite domination.

*The Constitution regards the 1979 Iranian Revolution as a basis for the continuation of that revolution both inside and outside Iran.

For example:

Article 2 of the Constitution: “….The Islamic Republic is a system based on belief …[that] there is no god except Allah…. [and] the necessity of submission to His commands…. ensuring the uninterrupted process of the revolution of Islam…. ”

Article 4: “All civil, penal, financial, economic, administrative, cultural, military, political, and other laws and regulations must be based on Islamic [Shiite] criteria….”

Article 152: “The foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is based upon the rejection of all forms of domination [a common reference to the US] ….”

Article 154: “….[The Constitution] supports the just struggles of the mustad’afun [oppressed] against the mustakbirun [oppressors, especially the ‘Great American Satan’] in every corner of the globe….”

The underestimated Ayatollahs’ threat to the US

General Erik Kurilla, Commander of the US Central Command, warned that “our concerns about Iran go beyond its nuclear capability,” noting Iran’s ballistic missile program and Iran’s support of terror entities and rogue regimes.

According to the Saudi ArabNews, “the free movement of Iranian and Hezbollah [Iran’s proxy] agents through Mexico, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Chile, Colombia, Bolivia, Ecuador and especially the Tri-Border Area of Argentina-Paraguay-Brazil [facilitates] the entry to the US through legitimate border crossings or among convoys of illegal immigrants. The presence of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hezbollah in Latin America is considered a vital Iranian asset, as it provides a base from which strikes can be launched against US targets….

“The Tri-Border Area hosts a significant Muslim population, and Iran is suspected of infiltrating and manipulating this community, which offers protection for Iranian agents and facilitates their movements in the region….

“Since September 11, 2001, the US intelligence has been on guard against terrorist cells forming in this under-policed corner.  Hezbollah has piggybacked on the [Shiite] Lebanese diaspora presence. It has developed local contacts to facilitate and conceal its drug-trafficking, money-laundering and terror-financing operations….

“Iran has established more than 36 Shiite cultural centers in 17 countries, many of which are allegedly being used as spy rings to gather intelligence.  In Latin America, the cultural centers act as hubs for recruiting spies and building popular support for Iran…. Through these connections, Iran hopes to respond to US pressure from close proximity….”

According to The Washington, DC-based Atlantic Council, “Iran could use some Central and South American countries as a launchpad for operations against Washington and its interests in the region…. Iran sees Latin America as a means to create blowback for Washington… Tehran capitalized on shifting power dynamics in an increasingly multipolar world and a tide of anti-US sentiments in Latin America, in order to assert Iranian influence, most notably in countries where Left-leaning governments were in power…. Iran deepened its relations with Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Bonded, mainly, by a shared opposition to US foreign policy, Iran and these countries found much common cause…. The roots of [Iran-supported] terror groups may be many miles away, but their branches twist around the globe, raising funds [money laundering], seeking recruits, probing for US weaknesses and challenging US defenses….”

James Philips, an expert on Middle East affairs and international terrorism at the Washington, DC-based Heritage Foundation concludes: “…. Iran is conducting anti-U.S. operations from Latin America, including military training camps in Venezuela, and expanding its reach across the border from the U.S. in Mexico…. [Iran] plans to launch from Mexico a cyber war on the United States, one that would cripple U.S. computer systems, including the White House, the FBI, the CIA and several nuclear plants…. Iranian military training camps are working from mosques in Venezuela…. Iranian-backed money-laundering and drug-trafficking cartels that are used to back Islamist networks and training camps in Venezuela and elsewhere, which exist to attack U.S. interests and undermine the U.S. in Latin America….”

The bottom line

As documented by the Ayatollahs’ Constitution, the education system and the systematic track record of Iran’s apocalyptic regime – since seizing power in 1979 – it is driven by a fanatic, religious and megalomaniacal vision.

This does not qualify them as “good-faith negotiators,” neither as susceptible to abandoning their vision and refraining from subversion and terrorism, nor accepting peaceful-coexistence with their Sunni Arab neighbors.

The reality of the Ayatollahs is inconsistent with a diplomatic option, but is consistent with the option of regime-change.

Support Appreciated

According to the Washington, DC-based White House Historical Association, the 1978/79 US policy on Iran, that embraced Ayatollah Khomeini, betrayed the pro-US Shah of Iran, and failed the pro-US Sunni Arab regimes, was based on a superficial view of Middle East political, religious, cultural and historical reality:

“…. In January 1979, the Shah fled into exile, and the theocratic regime of Khomeini took power. There was little informed understanding in the U.S. government about the political implications of this fundamentalist regime. Gary Sick, who was on the National Security staff, recalled a meeting in which Vice President Walter Mondale asked the CIA director Stansfield Turner, ‘What the hell is an Ayatollah anyway.’ Turner said he wasn’t sure he knew….”

However, the New York-based Foreign Affairs Magazine claims that – following President Carter’s initial assessment that Ayatollah Khomeini would be preoccupied with tractors rather than with tanks – the US President amended his position on Iran, concluding that regime-change was the most realistic policy toward Iran, because the Ayatollahs were relentlessly anti-American, ill-faith negotiators, neither partners for peaceful coexistence, nor amenable to democracy or to abandoning their anti-US fanatic vision:

“….Recently declassified documents reveal that in December 1979, Carter issued a presidential finding—a notification to Congress required under laws passed in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal—ordering the CIA to ‘conduct propaganda and political and economic action operations to encourage the establishment of a responsible and democratic regime in Iran; make contacts with Iranian opposition leaders and interested governments in order to encourage interactions that could lead to a broad, pro-Western front capable of forming an alternative government….’ The CIA attempted to organize external Iranian opposition groups into a cohesive force, tried to aid dissidents in Iran, and enlisted regional powers such as Saudi Arabia to help undermine the nascent theocracy….”

Has the 1979-2022 track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs justified President Carter’s transformation of policy from diplomacy to regime-change?

1979-2022 track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs: rogue or good-faith?

*Since the February 1979, Iran has been transformed from “The American Policeman of the Gulf” to the anti-US Islamic Republic, preoccupied with a global exportation of the anti-US Islamic Revolution.

*Since February 1979, they have promoted an anti-US education system and hateful mosque sermons. They have committed horrific violations of human rights, in general, and women rights, in particular. In addition, they have perpetrated regional and global anti-US subversion, terrorism and civil wars; proliferated conventional and non-conventional military technologies (including in Latin America). Iran’s Ayatollahs have established close strategic ties with North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador, Chile, Syria, Taliban, Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Hamas, as well as the leading drug cartels of Mexico, Columbia and Bolivia, in addition to Latin American terror organizations.

*Since February 1979, Iran’s Ayatollahs have been a classic apocalyptic, thick-skinned regime, driven by a 1,400-year-old fanatic, imperialistic Shiite vision, brainwashing Iranian youth to martyrdom. This has transcended the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, extending to South and Central America, all the way to the US-Mexico border – the US’ backyard and soft underbelly.

*Since February 1979, they have dedicated substantial resources to the exportation of their Islamic revolution, in order to advance the establishment of a global Shiite entity, vanquish (peacefully or militarily) the “apostate” and “heretic” Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan and Egypt, and bring to submission the “infidel” West, especially “The Great American Satan.”

*Since 1979, Iran’s ayatollahs have demonstrated a tendency to bite the hand that feeds them, as transpired in November 1979, when they took over the US embassy in Tehran and held more than 50 Americans hostage for 444 days, following the critical US assistance to their takeover of Iran. Also, in 2015, the US-engineered JCPOA rewarded the Ayatollahs with some $150 billion, most of which was invested in bolstering their anti-US global machine of terror, subversion, drug trafficking and money laundering.

*The 1979 and 2015 US attempts to sooth the Ayatollas’ fanaticism have backfired, whetting the Ayatollas’ megalomaniacal appetite, and undermining the US’ global stature.

*The 1979-2022 track record of the Ayatollahs, demonstrates that their worldview is not amenable to peaceful-coexistence, democracy and human rights, nor good-faith negotiation.

*In fact, the 1979-2022 track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs, on the one hand, and the assumption that they are potentially good-faith negotiators, on the other hand, constitute a self-destructive oxymoron.

*Waiving the military option and the regime-change option reflects an assumption that such a policy would constrain the Ayatollahs’ violence. However – as expected – waiving these options has been perceived by the Ayatollahs as weakness, and therefore, intensifying their anti-US violence.

*It was the November 1979 seizure of the US Embassy, which transformed President Carter from a true-believer in Iran’s Ayatollahs as good-faith negotiators into the realization that the Ayatollahs are inherently anti-US and ill-faith negotiators, and therefore subject to regime-change.

*Shouldn’t the 1979-2022 systematic rogue track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs convince the US Executive and the co-equal US Legislature that regime-change (not regime-bolstering) is the proper option? Or, do they assume that the Iranian leopard may be capable of changing spots, not just tactics….

Support Appreciated

(More data available here and here)

”Many observers wonder how Iran, while in a difficult economic situation, can afford to finance a massive campaign to destabilize the region, as well as an extensive network of agents in the West. They should pay attention to the involvement of Iranian special services in the global drug trafficking [and mega-billion-dollar money laundering]….”

“A commercial jetliner from Venezuela’s state-run Conviasa Airline flew from Caracas to Tehran via Damascus, Syria, every week with a cargo-hold full of drugs and cash, nicknamed “Aeroterror,” because the return flight often carried weapons and was packed with Hezbollah and Iranian operatives whom the Venezuelan government would provide with fake identities and travel documents on their arrival…. From there, the operatives spread throughout the subcontinent….”

Shiite clerics in Iran and Lebanon have determined that narco-trafficking is morally acceptable when drugs are sold to Western “infidels,” and especially to “The Great American Satan.” They have concluded that drugs may be more effective a weapon than guns.

Iran’s Ayatollahs bite the hand that feeds them

In 1979, President Carter assumed that Iran’s Ayatollahs were amenable to peaceful coexistence. Therefore, he turned against the Shah of Iran – who was “America’s Policeman in the Persian Gulf” – and provided a tailwind to their rise to power, since “they would be preoccupied with tractors, not with tanks.”  However, as expected, upon toppling the Shah of Iran, the Ayatollahs regime bit the hand that fed them, and leveraged the critical US support to transforming Iran into the lead epicenter of anti-US terrorism and drug trafficking, highlighting rogue operations in Latin America, the US’ soft underbelly.

In 2015, President Obama was convinced that Iran’s Ayatollahs could be induced to peaceful coexistence.  Therefore, he heralded the nuclear accord with Iran (JCPOA) as a binding strategic agreement and a step toward “a safer and more secure US and world.”  However, as expected, Iran’s Ayatollahs considered the JCPOA as a tenuous tactical agreement and a financial bonanza, bolstering their anti-US strategy of subversion, terrorism, development and proliferation of advanced military technologies, drug trafficking and money laundering, highlighting rogue operations in Latin America, a critical anti-US Iranian beachhead.

In 2022, President Biden has concluded that a generous financial and diplomatic package could entice Iran’s Ayatollahs to abandon their 1,400-year-old fanatic imperialistic vision.  Therefore, he is determined to conclude another agreement with Iran’s Ayatollahs, which – he assumes – would advance regional and global peaceful coexistence.  However, Iran’s Ayatollahs view any agreement with the US as a significant financial boost to their systematic anti-US agenda, bolstering their rogue operations in Latin America, the doorstep of the US.

Iran’s anti-US Narco-Jihad

“Iranian “Narco Jihad” [is conducted] against Western countries and primarily against the United States…. Iran, in particular, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Hezbollah, [the proxy of] Iran are involved in the global drug trafficking [and money laundering] network…. [Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps] uses funds from the drug trafficking for the supply of arms and ammunition to anti-US terror and rogue entities [in Latin America]…. Currently, illegal drug trafficking is considered one of the most profitable [mega billion dollar] activities…. IranAir planes operating on scheduled flights to and from [Latin America] are also involved in the transportation of drugs….”

“….In the years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when Washington’s focus was elsewhere, Hezbollah and Iran cultivated alliances with governments along the “cocaine corridor” from the tip of South America to Mexico, to turn them against the United States. The strategy worked in Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela….

“….Cocaine shipments, some from Latin America to West Africa and on to Europe and the Middle East, and others through Venezuela and Mexico to the United States…. In West Africa, satellite imagery has documented that the Hezbollah used-car money-laundering operation is bigger than ever….

“Multi-ton loads of cocaine enter the United States, and hundreds of millions of dollars going to a U.S.-designated terrorist organization with vast reach…. [Iran and Hezbollah] are working with Mexico’s brutal Los Zetas cartel to move multi-ton loads of cocaine directly into the United States, and washing $200 million a month in criminal proceeds with the help of 300 or so used car dealerships. The network funnels huge amounts of money to the dealerships to purchase used cars, which would then be shipped to Benin, on Africa’s west coast….

“[Iran and Hezbollah resemble a] human hub of a criminal enterprise with spokes emanating from Tehran outward into Latin America, Africa, Europe and the United States via hundreds of legitimate businesses and front companies….

“Hezbollah operates like the Gambino crime family on steroids…. Hezbollah continues to scout potential U.S. targets for attack if it decides Washington has crossed some red line against it or Iran.  [The Mexican daily] El Universal reported that the Mexican Sinaloa drug cartel’s elite assassins are trained in Iran….”

”The focus [of Iran and Hezbollah] was on forming relationships with Mexican drug cartels and establishing a residence with the aid of the cartels. The Mexican cartels have gained a dangerous ally by sympathizing with Hezbollah’s cause…. The threat of an attack by Hezbollah against the United States has always been present. It has only become more realistic… due to their spread of activity and influence in Latin America and Mexico. Their criminal activities and alliances with drug trafficking organizations such as Los Zetas [drug cartel] illustrates a growing and dormant threat south of the border….

“The increasing presence of middle-eastern terrorist groups in Mexico presents an alarming scenario, where planted terrorists integrate and assimilate with the culture of the country and cross the border. This is a reality and it has only evolved in practice…. The terrorist-criminal nexus of Hezbollah and Los Zetas…has serious implications for the national security [of the US]…. The Los Zetas cartel remains the most sophisticated and one of the most dangerous and powerful drug cartels in Mexico…. It has already infiltrated the U.S…..

“…. Venezuela and Chile are hosts to Hezbollah bases already and several more countries have already been supporting [Hezbollah]. Mexico makes it all the more deadly because of the proximity just south of the United States border….”

“…. The lawless tri-border area between Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay [a chief financial source of Hezbollah terrorism] has been documented as the central hub of Iranian and Hezbollah activity in Latin America…. Hezbollah and Iran have raised funds throughout Latin America by appealing to the well-established Lebanese and Shiite diaspora in the region [especially in Paraguay’s Ciudad del Este, a paradise for drug traffickers, money launderers, organized crime and Islamic terrorists]….

“Hezbollah partners in various capacities with Mexican cartels such as the Sinaloa cartel, the preeminent drug trafficking organization in that country…. helped the Sinaloa cartel build smuggling tunnels under the U.S.-Mexican border….”

The bottom line

*The aforementioned track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs contradict the assumption that they are, potentially, good faith negotiators, who could be induced – through a generous financial and diplomatic package – to abandon their fanatic, religious, imperialistic vision, and amenable to peaceful-coexistence and power-sharing with their Arab Sunni neighbors and the Western “infidel.”

*A failure to realize that the Ayatollahs track record, on the one hand, and the assumption that they are potentially good faith negotiators, on the other hand, constitutes a classic oxymoron, would doom the US to repeat the critical policy errors, which led to its critical support of Ayatollah Khomeini’s rise to power in 1979 and to the JCPOA in 2015.  On both occasions, the US – unintentionally – produced a robust tailwind to an arch terrorist and drug trafficking regime, which has posed – since 1979 – a clear and present danger to the homeland and national security of the US.

*Iran’s Ayatollahs are the epitome of terrorists who bite the (American) hand that feeds them.

Support Appreciated