Facebook Feed

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2023: bit.ly/3ZdlxHY ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
אתגר מרכזי לביטחון לאומי: bit.ly/3xkSwh1 ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
US-sponsored anti-Israel UN Security Council statement - acumen: bit.ly/3lVqpCM ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
bit.ly/3xHPCDc הסכמי אברהם – אינטרס ערבי, אמריקאי וישראלי: ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

Iran’s Constitution exposes the Ayatollahs’ threat to the USA

(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




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb

The Abraham Accords – the US, Arab interests and Israel

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan believe that the expansion of the Abraham Accords, the enhancement of Israel-Saudi defense and commercial cooperation and the conclusion of an Israel-Saudi Arabia peace accord are preconditioned upon major Israeli concessions to the Palestinian Authority.

Is such a belief consistent with Middle East reality?

Arab interests

*The signing of the Abraham Accords, and the role played by Saudi Arabia as a critical engine of the accords, were driven by the national security, economic and diplomatic interests of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and the Sudan.

*The Arab interest in peace accords with Israel was not triggered by the realization that the Jewish State was genuinely seeking peaceful-coexistence, nor by a departure from the fundamental tenets of Islam. It was motivated by the assessment that critical concerns of the respective Arab countries would be effectively-served by Israel’s advanced military (Qualitative Military Edge), technological and diplomatic capabilities in the face of mutual and lethal enemies, such as Iran’s Ayatollahs and Muslim Brotherhood terrorism.

*Saudi Arabia and the six Arab peace partners of Israel (including Egypt and Jordan) are aware that the Middle East resembles a volcano, which occasionally releases explosive lava – domestically and/or regionally – in an unpredictable manner, as evidenced by the 1,400-year-old stormy intra-Arab/Muslim relations, and recently demonstrated by the Arab Tsunami, which erupted in 2011 and still rages.

They wish to minimize the impact of rogue regimes, and therefore are apprehensive about the nature of the proposed Palestinian state, in view of the rogue Palestinian inter-Arab track record, which has transformed Palestinians into an intra-Arab role model of subversion, terrorism, treachery and ingratitude.

*They are anxious about the erosion of the US posture of deterrence, which is their most critical component of national security, and alarmed about the 43-year-old US diplomatic option toward Iran’s Ayatollahs, which has bolstered the Ayatollahs’ terroristic, drug trafficking and ballistic capabilities. They are also concerned about the US’ embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Sunni terrorist entity with religious, educational, welfare and political branches. And, they are aware of the ineffectiveness of NATO (No Action Talk Only?), the European vacillation, and the vulnerability of all other Arab countries.

Israel’s role

*Saudi Arabia and the Arab partners to peace accords with Israel feel the machetes of the Ayatollahs and the Moslem Brotherhood at their throats. They consider Israel as the most reliable “life insurance agent” in the region.  They view Israel as the most effective US force-multiplier in the Middle East, and appreciate Israel’s proven posture of deterrence; flexing its military muscles against Iran’s Ayatollahs in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran itself and against Palestinian and Hezbollah terrorism. They respect Israel’s unique counter-terrorism intelligence and training capabilities, and its game-changing military and counter-terrorism battle tactics and technologies.

*The Arab view of Israel as a reliable partner on “a rainy day” has been bolstered by Israel’s willingness to defy US pressure, when it comes to Israel’s most critical national security and historic credos (e.g., Iran, Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria).  In addition, Saudi Arabia and Israel’s peace-partners aim to leverage Israel’s good-standing among most Americans – and therefore among most Senators and House Representatives – as a venue to enhance their military, commercial and diplomatic ties with the US.

*Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain are preoccupied with the challenge of economic diversification, realizing that they are overly-reliant on oil and natural gas, which are exposed to price-volatility, depletion and could be replaced by emerging cleaner and more cost-effective energy.

Thus, they consider Israel’s ground-breaking technologies as a most effective vehicle to diversify their economy, create more jobs in non-energy sectors, and establish a base for alternative sources of national income, while bolstering homeland and national security.

*The Abraham Accords – as well as Israel’s peace accords with Egypt and Jordan – and the unprecedented expansion of defense and commercial cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Israel, demonstrate that critical Arab national security interests may supersede fundamental tenets of Islam, such as the 1,400-year-old rejection of any “infidel” sovereignty in “the abode of Islam.”  Moreover, critical national security interests may lead to a dramatic moderation of the (Arab) education system, which is the most authentic reflection of one’s vision and policies.

Thus, contrary to the Palestinian Authority, the United Arab Emirates has uprooted hate-education curriculum, replacing it with pro-Israel/Jewish curriculum.

Abraham Accords’ durability

*The success of the Abraham Accords was a result of avoiding the systematic mistakes committed by the US State Department. The latter has produced a litany of failed peace proposals, centered on the Palestinian issue, while the Abraham accords bypassed the Palestinian issue, avoiding a Palestinian veto, and focusing on Arab interests. Therefore, the durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the interests of the respective Arab countries, and not on the Palestinian issue, which is not a top priority for any Arab country.

*The durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the stability of the individual Arab countries and the Middle East at-large.

*The Abraham Accord have yielded initial and unprecedented signs of moderation, modernity and peaceful coexistence, which requires the US to support the respective pro-US Arab regimes, rather than pressuring them (e.g., Saudi Arabia and the UAE).

*However, one should not ignore the grave threats to the durability of the accords, posed by the volcanic nature of the unstable, highly-fragmented, unpredictable, violently intolerant, non-democratic and tenuous Middle East (as related to intra-Arab relations!).  These inherent threats would be dramatically alleviated by a resolute US support.

*A major threat to the Abraham Accord is the tenuous nature of most Arab regimes in the Middle East, which yields tenuous policies and tenuous accords. For example, in addition to the Arab Tsunami of 2010 (which is still raging on the Arab Street), non-ballot regime-change occurred (with a dramatic change of policy) in Egypt (2013, 2012, 1952), Iran (1979, 1953), Iraq (2003, 1968, 1963-twice, 1958), Libya (2011, 1969), Yemen (a civil war since the ’90s, 1990, 1962), etc.

*Regional stability, the Abraham Accords and US interests would be undermined by the proposed Palestinian state west of the Jordan River (bearing in mind the intra-Arab Palestinian track record). It would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River; transforming Jordan into another platform of regional and global Islamic terrorism, similar to Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen; triggering a domino scenario, which would threaten every pro-US Arab oil-producing country in the Arabian Peninsula; yielding a robust tailwind to Iran’s Ayatollahs, Russia and China and a major headwind to the US.

*While Middle East reality defines policies and accords as variable components of national security, the topography and geography of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and the Golan Heights are fixed components of Israel’s minimal security requirements in the reality of the non-Western Middle East. Israel’s fixed components of national security have secured its survival, and have dramatically enhanced its posture of deterrence. They transformed the Jewish State into a unique force and dollar multiplier for the US.

*The more durable the Abraham Accords and the more robust Israel’s posture of deterrence, the more stable the pro-US Arab regimes and the Middle East at-large; the more deterred are anti-US rogue regimes; the less potent are Middle Eastern epicenters of anti-US terrorism and drug trafficking; the more bolstered is the US global posture and the weaker is the posture of the US’ enemies and adversaries.

*Would the Arab regimes of the Abraham Accords precondition their critical ties with Israel upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, which they view as a rogue element? Would they sacrifice their national security and economic interests on the altar of the Palestinian issue? Would they cut off their nose to spite their face?

The fact that these Arab regimes concluded the Abraham Accords without preconditioning it upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, and that they limit their support of the Palestinians to talk, rather than walk, provides an answer to these three questions.

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb