It has always been said...
The greatest tragedy the Islamic World is experiencing is that despite living within a geographical region with a hegemony feature, its actors are quite ordinary.
We are going through chaotic times that justify this statement.
Ordinary and malevolent, these actors can crawl into bed with their devils, when required, and Iran is on top of the list.
Pushed towards a “manageable” revolution period against Russia, as part of the Eurasia strategy by the U.S. in 1979, Tehran is now used as a figurant in the internal conflict in the Islamic world.
The objective of making the Persians tin soldiers of imperial politics is no doubt to align the politically and geo-culturally resistant New Turkey.
In this sense, Tehran is a locomotive of the “slavery or death” notion of the “Melian politics” imposed upon the Islamic world by the U.S...
No matter what anyone says, the Shia militia sent to Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria fighting against Hezbollah and Houthi militants are like the U.S. controlled missiles in the region.
The Pentagon paralyzed Syria, Iraq and Yemen with these tin soldiers of Iran.
****
Iran has waged war on the New Turkey, compromising with its small and big devils (the U.S. and Israel) and its tiny devils (the Gulf countries), and thus has become Washington's crowbar in the Middle East and Eurasia.
Iran has become a natural ally to the West's “war on terrorism” since it is an enemy to Al Qaeda, ISIS and the Taliban, because of its Shia fanaticism.
Those who have focused on the demonization of the Western media and have been shielded cannot see how Tehran is practically serving the U.S. and Israel.
In his book “The Untold Story of Nuclear Fear”, Porter explicitly explains how the phenomenon, the “Iran threat”, is built.
In his 2005 book “The Persian Puzzle” and the 2013 book “Unthinkable”, Kenneth Pollack, CİA's ex-chief of the Iran table, explains how Tehran has been cooperating with Israel and the U.S. since 1980.
In her groundbreaking book “Treacherous Alliance” (2007) in respect to the Middle East, Trita Parsi lines up the dirty relationships in a conceptual and chronologic order.
***
As some of you remember...
Khomeini's anti-West/Israel statements in the 1980s were more severe than Ahmedinejad's rhetoric, made after he became president in 2005: “Israel must be wiped off the map.”
However, as Iraq was a stronger enemy than Iran for Israel and the U.S. in the 1980s, Khomeini's harsh statements were not considered as a geo-political threat.
As a matter of fact, these statements were useful in terms of hiding intricate bargains.
Menashri from Tel Aviv University expresses this reality in his words: “No one talked about the Iranian threat in the 1980s. In fact this wasn't even mentioned.”
Because, the real threat then for the U.S. was Iraq, who was geographically closer to Israel and in dialogue with Soviet Russia.
Israel's primary enemy then was Saddam who had formed the world's fourth largest army with the help of Soviet Russia, not Khomeini.
Therefore, the U.S. and Israel supported Tehran during the Iraq-Iran war.
However, with Soviet Russia falling apart, a collapse period started for Saddam Hussein, too.
Receiving a blow with the 1st Gulf War in 1991, Saddam was executed after the occupation of Iraq in 2003.
***
Describing Iran as a geo-politically positive country, Israeli general Brom says, “There wasn't a specific problem with Iran. The only problem was eliminating Iraq. When Saddam was gone, Tehran came to the forefront as a threat to Israel.”
The Chief of Mossad from 2002 to 2011, Dagan described those who were characterized as mullahs as “irrationalized” and called them “moderate”.
Israel's newly retired (2011-2015) chief of staff, Gantz, had said, “The staff in Tehran are very realist.”
The Chief of staff between 2005 and 2007, Halutz, confessed, “Iran is a serious but non-vital threat.”
“I don't believe Iran is an existential threat”, said Halevy, an ex-chief of Mossad (1998-2003) who supported nuclear reconciliation.
****
Yet, NYT author Brooks denotes that reconciliation with Iran is the “third American defeat” after Vietnam and Iraq.
However, the reality is way different than what Brooks portrays.
According to Kaplan from The Atlantic, “ From now on, Iran is America's soldier on land.”
Jaffe from the WP, describes the reasons behind the U.S. going public about its relations with Iran as follows: “Losing the Iraq and Afghan wars, redesigning the Middle East, the Arab Spring sabotaging the imperial Project, the Ukrainian crisis, China steering the global economy Wheel and the restart of the Cold War with Russia...”
While CNN said, “Reconciliation was the best option”, Iran's official broadcasting organization NPR said: “ Reconciliation isn't just done in terms of nuclear.....”
According to WSJ, by reconciliating, Iran has now become CIA director Brennan's “favorite in the B Group.”
***
The most realist comment on Tehran's dirty alliance was made by Foreign Policy author Rothkopf : “Global Powers negotiating with Iran on the nuclear issue is just a piece of the puzzle it developed in terms of the Middle East and Turkey...”
With its Middle East projects “ Big Israel” and “ Big Middle East” falling apart, in order to restrain Turkey, the U.S. now has put in place its “Big Iran Project” running from the Caspian to the Aden Gulf.
Except that Turkey has changed everything by counter-moving since April.
At a time when even Riyadh rescued Yemen from the Iranian effect, no one can expect Turkey to leave its hinterland to the Persians.
Crumbling Tehran's strategy to dominate Erbil in 2011, Turkey activated its B Plan intended for Syria after July 12.
Turning all of Iran's scenarios upside down, Turkey's demand to create a safe zone in Syria was accepted.
Hitting the panic button, the Persians have been repeatedly saying, “Assad is our red line.”
Attacking Turkey via the PKK and President Erdoğan through government media, Tehran has now started a “diplomatic dance” with Russia in order to find some ground in Syria.
***
By considering all the historical facts, one should clearly understand the difference of the New Turkey, who is in a struggle against the internals: PKK, Parallel, CHP, HDP and MHP (who have become similar in nature and style) and the externals: Iran, Israel, Syria, Egypt and the U.S., who have become the same.
If we choose “ the presented” instead of “ the essential choice” we will not be freed from the pressure.
Exactly like the U.S.'s imposition “I have reconciliated with Iran, now you reconcile with the CHP.”
Now at this point, Turkey's most urgent problem is neither the PKK nor the Parallel Structure.
Being activated at the same time as the Iran Revolution during the Cold War period, none of these organizations have been able to compete with Turkey.
Besides, becoming harder to re-format, these two organizations have already been discarded by the “superior mind”.
At this point, Turkey's most urgent problem is; the policy it will develop against the New Iran that was designed by and set against us by the imperial order.
It seems that the “B Plan” Ankara has activated and the critical moves it has taken, after realizing Tehran's dirty alliances and analyzing them properly, are now effectively working.
Otherwise, if we lose the “New Geography” in the West of Iraq and Syria to Tehran and its “superior mind”, we will be imprisoned in Anatolia, just as we were in the 20th century.
