I have said that repeatedly and say it one more time. You have only one reliable option in this matter and nothing else. Don't waste your time, energy and resources anymore.
M. Sirani 31.05.2015
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Saturday, May 30, 2015
Nowadays; The Era of Intellectual Famine.
Nowadays, in the
highly industrialized societies I mean, they don’t force you like Socrates to
drink a fatal poisonous liquid; neither burn you like Joan of Arc in front of a
church; nor send you like Machiavelli into the exile, nor execute you like
Lumumba in the captivity; nor shot you dead like Che Guevara in the remote area
of an unknown forest; nor contaminate your body with a deadly virus or radioactive
substance; nor assassinate you in a so-called ‘air, train or car accident’; nor
put you in prison nor torture you like those large numbers political activists,
who are imprisoned because of their ideas in all underdeveloped countries
around the world. Instead, they just simply ignore you; marginalize you;
isolate you; drown you within an ocean full of rejected job applications; push
you in the stage of unemployment benefit and humiliate you in a very unfair,
unjust, cruel and of course ineffective manner, in order to crush your idea,
mind, soul and body. This is the typical reaction of our modern era with new
thinkers; those thinkers, who don’t want to simply follow the destructive parts
of the current dysfunctional system just like a loyal and brainless sheep. This is apparently the
miraculous by-product of the ‘invisible hand’ that Adam Smith promised us
nearly 250 years ago. This is, by all means, the naked tragedy of nowadays. This
is the end of the Enlightenment Era and beginning of what I name it: The Era of
Intellectual Famine.
M. Sirani 30.05.2015
Friday, May 29, 2015
A Free Verse: A Naked Tango
A Naked
Tango
Far from a nasty distance
Far from my lost world
A sweet dreamy voice
Calls my forgotten name
An intense magic song
That echoes in my solitude
A lovely whispering tune
That touches my weary soul
A series of tempting signs
That all boldly invites me
To a long-lasting dance
On the edge of maturity
A last naked tango perhaps
At the final stage of my life
What a pleasant rush at this age
What an exciting rush at this time
M. Sirani 26.05.2015
An Epigram: Touching You.
Touching
you
In my endless gloomy world
When AM or PM of time is meaningless
When boundary between day and night is disordered
When four seasons seem soullessly just one-colored
When sunshine has lost its warmth
When moonlight does not inspire any passion
When stars do not blink anymore
When whole universe seems frozen
Touching your warm hand
Soft
lips
Silky skin
Elegant body
Are undeniably the endless
pleasures
***
But
Touching your delicate feelings
Decent
heart
Pure soul
Are the ultimate divine destination
***
That's my heartful feeling
about
Being
with you
Having you
And
Touching you
An amazing journey toward eternal happiness
A bold voyage toward perpetual peace
That’s what touching you means to me
***
Oh dear
Let me know you more
Understand
you better
Explore you deeper
Feel you closer
Before it’s too late anymore
Cause
Life is a precious but extremely
short odyssey
M. Sirani 18.05.2015
A Free Verse: Joyful Flashback.
Joyful Childhood
I'm
hunger for those sweet days
When we
rang the doorbells
And ran
fast like a silver bullet
When we
picked apples
From
neighbor's yard secretly
And
vanished fast like a genie in the air
Oh
dear…, I miss those days badly
It’s
been a long time since then
But
still I’m truly longing
For
those sweet days
For
those innocent joys
For
those decent naughty moves
For
those childish criminal acts
For
those risky impossible missions
For
those exciting moments of fear and joy
For
those juvenile hits and runs
For
those honest
Oh dear….,
I miss those sweet days
If you
still feel rebellion
Deep
inside your heart and soul
If you
still miss those adventures
Just
like me; like those days
Then
come along with me
Let's
re-taste those joys again
Let's
repeat those risky events again
Let's
rewrite a new chapter
A new
historical chapter
About
decent secret joy
About
pure camaraderie
About long-lasting
love
M. Sirani 28.05.2015
A Ditty: What is My Race???!!!
What is my race???!!!
Black or white
Red or yellow
Green or brown
What’s the difference
For petty fellow like you
Who rationally is blind?
M. Sirani
29.05.2015
Fully Corrupted FIFA & Sepp Blatter's Reappointment.
Briefly:
In 'The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon' Marx says:
"History repeats,,,,, first as tragedy, then as farce". So is the case of Sepp Blatter's reappointment.
Note: when an international organization like FIFA is fully corrupted and the whole world is watching this event, what would we expect from the third world countries? How should i or some ordinary people trust you? You think you are very smart and the rest of the world are retarded, illiterate or blind to understand such an unfair event and alike?
M. Sirani 29.05.2015
In 'The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon' Marx says:
"History repeats,,,,, first as tragedy, then as farce". So is the case of Sepp Blatter's reappointment.
Note: when an international organization like FIFA is fully corrupted and the whole world is watching this event, what would we expect from the third world countries? How should i or some ordinary people trust you? You think you are very smart and the rest of the world are retarded, illiterate or blind to understand such an unfair event and alike?
M. Sirani 29.05.2015
Wednesday, May 27, 2015
My Predictions About the Current Tensions in the Middle East.
Briefly:
1- The Nuclear deal with Iran. The chance that the 5+1 would be able to reach a reliable agreement with Iran is very low. If the 5+1 would reach an agreement with Iran, the deal will not have any credibility and reliability due to the lack of transparency and cooperation of Iran with IAEA. To put it simply, Iran might sign the agreement, but the Islamic Regime will obtain its nuclear weapon secretly somewhere in the future; whether you like it or not.
2- The current tension in Yemen: The Saudi-led coalition cannot defeat Iran and its puppet i.e. the Houthis in Yemen by the military intervention. If the coalition would continue with this policy without any adjustment or compromise with Houthis, the civil war in Yemen will become a chaotic triangle civil war in the long term. A prolonged civil war between 1- Shiite Houthis, 2- Sunni group and 3- Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorist groups. In the long term (depends on the period of civil war), some of Sunni groups will inevitably join the different terrorist groups in Yemen. One more issue to mention is that, if the tension in Yemen continues, the civil war will undoubtedly spillover into Saudi Arabia somewhere in the future.
3- The Syrian regime is totally Iran's puppet. the current Iraqi government is not an inclusive and is completely under the command of Iranian Regime. The basic side effects of these two issues are equivalent to the lack of democratic institutions and totally marginalization and deprivation of the large numbers of Sunni people. These desperate Sunni people have no other choice, unless joining ISIS, Al-Qaeda or some other terrorist groups in these two countries. Some rich Arab people would fuel this tension by offering large amount of money in this matter. As such, the civil war in both Iraq and Syria will continue like a cat and mouse game without any tangible or winning result for any actor that are involved in these countries.
4- If the international community would not be able to find some diplomatic solutions for these conflicts mentioned above as soon as possible, the scope of the tension from Iraq, Syria and Yemen will inevitably and intentionally spillover to other Arab countries in the region somewhere in the future. This is a huge mistake (i emphasize) if someone thinks that the tension will not spillover in some other countries, for example, Lebanon or Jordan because it has not happen in the last four years. Such a thinking is extremely and totally wrong; simply because the level of tension between the main actors in the region has arrived into a very critical stage. There is high probability that the situation is completely going out of the control of any state or international body.
M. Sirani 27.05.2015
1- The Nuclear deal with Iran. The chance that the 5+1 would be able to reach a reliable agreement with Iran is very low. If the 5+1 would reach an agreement with Iran, the deal will not have any credibility and reliability due to the lack of transparency and cooperation of Iran with IAEA. To put it simply, Iran might sign the agreement, but the Islamic Regime will obtain its nuclear weapon secretly somewhere in the future; whether you like it or not.
2- The current tension in Yemen: The Saudi-led coalition cannot defeat Iran and its puppet i.e. the Houthis in Yemen by the military intervention. If the coalition would continue with this policy without any adjustment or compromise with Houthis, the civil war in Yemen will become a chaotic triangle civil war in the long term. A prolonged civil war between 1- Shiite Houthis, 2- Sunni group and 3- Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorist groups. In the long term (depends on the period of civil war), some of Sunni groups will inevitably join the different terrorist groups in Yemen. One more issue to mention is that, if the tension in Yemen continues, the civil war will undoubtedly spillover into Saudi Arabia somewhere in the future.
3- The Syrian regime is totally Iran's puppet. the current Iraqi government is not an inclusive and is completely under the command of Iranian Regime. The basic side effects of these two issues are equivalent to the lack of democratic institutions and totally marginalization and deprivation of the large numbers of Sunni people. These desperate Sunni people have no other choice, unless joining ISIS, Al-Qaeda or some other terrorist groups in these two countries. Some rich Arab people would fuel this tension by offering large amount of money in this matter. As such, the civil war in both Iraq and Syria will continue like a cat and mouse game without any tangible or winning result for any actor that are involved in these countries.
4- If the international community would not be able to find some diplomatic solutions for these conflicts mentioned above as soon as possible, the scope of the tension from Iraq, Syria and Yemen will inevitably and intentionally spillover to other Arab countries in the region somewhere in the future. This is a huge mistake (i emphasize) if someone thinks that the tension will not spillover in some other countries, for example, Lebanon or Jordan because it has not happen in the last four years. Such a thinking is extremely and totally wrong; simply because the level of tension between the main actors in the region has arrived into a very critical stage. There is high probability that the situation is completely going out of the control of any state or international body.
M. Sirani 27.05.2015
Tuesday, May 26, 2015
Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee Should Remind the Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi About Devastating and Inhuman Condition of The Rohingya people in Burma. Am i Right or Not?
I'm afraid someone like Ayatollah Khamenei or the king of Saudi Arabia will become the next Nobel Peace laureates somewhere in the future. Don't blame my harsh and naked statement in this matter. Because, we are living in the Era of Total Confusion; an era that economic and geopolitical interests are more important than human rights, moral, ethical and more generally liberal values. Aung San Suu Kyi was not / is not the first or last scandalous candidate of Nobel Peace Committee; so is the case of Shirin Ebadi that outrageously claims that Islam is compatible with democracy; that Islam promotes and defends the Women's rights in every aspect.
M. Sirani 26.05.2015
M. Sirani 26.05.2015
Saturday, May 23, 2015
Another Paradox in Our Contemporary Era of Total Confusion.
While nearly 2/3 of the current human population are to some degree deprived from the Universal Human Rights Principles, monkeys are going to achieve their rights in the Western countries. Should we be happy because of monkeys or sad about those large portion deprived human population?
M. Sirani 23.05.2015
M. Sirani 23.05.2015
Thursday, May 21, 2015
Delusional Lausanne Framework.
Briefly:
1- Iran would not allow any foreigner or foreign entity including IAEA inspectors visit its military sites in case of any suspicious and unusual activity or event.
2- Iran would not allow any foreigner including IAEA inspectors would talk with the Iranian nuclear scientists.
3- Iran would like to have 24-day advanced notice for inspection of its nuclear sites.
4- Iran insists that the sanctions should be lifted the day that the nuclear deal is signed.
5- After more than a decade effort, still IAEA has not been able to confirm the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activity; still IAEA has not been able to visit the suspicious site of Parchin.
Based on brief explanation noted above (and many other issues), the international community should deal with a serious question as follows.
How on earth, would the IAEA or any legitimate international entity be able to verify and control the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activity in the future?
M. Sirani 21.05.2015
1- Iran would not allow any foreigner or foreign entity including IAEA inspectors visit its military sites in case of any suspicious and unusual activity or event.
2- Iran would not allow any foreigner including IAEA inspectors would talk with the Iranian nuclear scientists.
3- Iran would like to have 24-day advanced notice for inspection of its nuclear sites.
4- Iran insists that the sanctions should be lifted the day that the nuclear deal is signed.
5- After more than a decade effort, still IAEA has not been able to confirm the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activity; still IAEA has not been able to visit the suspicious site of Parchin.
Based on brief explanation noted above (and many other issues), the international community should deal with a serious question as follows.
How on earth, would the IAEA or any legitimate international entity be able to verify and control the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activity in the future?
M. Sirani 21.05.2015
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Exclusive: ISIS is Closed to Abu Quraib Nearly 35 Kilometers Far From Baghdad. Do You Still Dare to Claim that Your Strategy Against ISIS Works?
No wonder that most of the Iraqi people do not trust USA in the battle against ISIS, according to the recent statement of an American Army General.
M. Sirani 20.05.2015
M. Sirani 20.05.2015
Terror Franchise; Al-Qaeda's Step-By-Step Instruction on How to Start A terror Cell.
Anyone, who thinks, that the radical Islamic groups can be destroyed by only military operation, is either very naive or his/her brain does not function in a normal and proper manner. (Pardon my language. Due to massive atrocities performed by various radical Islamic groups around the world, i couldn't hide or sensor my opinion in this matter.).
Reference:
Published by David Francis
Terror Franchise; Al Qaeda's step-by-step instructions on how to start a terror cell.
M. Sirani 20.05.2015
Tuesday, May 19, 2015
Alarming & Important Development in Ukraine. (Suspending Foreign Debt Payments or Applying Default and the Unpredictable Reaction of Russian Creditors).
Briefly:
According to Guardian news paper:
"Ukraine’s parliament on Tuesday handed ministers the power to suspend foreign debt payments to defend against “unscrupulous” creditors" (Guardian, 2015).
In addition to Greece, Italia, Portugal and Spain, Ukraine is facing a serious economic crisis. Today's parliamentary vote, however, indicate the fact that in addition to current civil war and economic problem, Ukraine would be the source of some other surprises in various terms in the near future(e.g. applying default and the reaction of Russian creditors). The international community, particularly the EU, should pay more attention to Ukraine because of its current special circumstances. The collapse of political system (or e.g. applying default or suspending foreign debt payments) in a country like Ukraine with a population size of nearly 45 million people would badly impact the whole EU in different terms.
M. Sirani 19.05.2015
Reference:
The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/19/ukraine-vote-gives-government-power-to-suspend-foreign-debt-payments
According to Guardian news paper:
"Ukraine’s parliament on Tuesday handed ministers the power to suspend foreign debt payments to defend against “unscrupulous” creditors" (Guardian, 2015).
In addition to Greece, Italia, Portugal and Spain, Ukraine is facing a serious economic crisis. Today's parliamentary vote, however, indicate the fact that in addition to current civil war and economic problem, Ukraine would be the source of some other surprises in various terms in the near future(e.g. applying default and the reaction of Russian creditors). The international community, particularly the EU, should pay more attention to Ukraine because of its current special circumstances. The collapse of political system (or e.g. applying default or suspending foreign debt payments) in a country like Ukraine with a population size of nearly 45 million people would badly impact the whole EU in different terms.
M. Sirani 19.05.2015
Reference:
The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/19/ukraine-vote-gives-government-power-to-suspend-foreign-debt-payments
Deploying Shiite Militia For Recapturing Ramadi Means: 1- More Influence of Iran 2- Deeper Fragmentation of Iraqi Society and 3- More benefit for ISIS in Terms of Recruitment of Iraqi Sunni People.
Needles to explore the negative consequences furthermore.
M. Sirani 19.05.2015
M. Sirani 19.05.2015
Monday, May 18, 2015
ISIS is Gaining Ground in Iraq More Than in Syria, Mainly Because, Current Iraqi Government is Not An Inclusive Political System.
Briefly:
This is a very clear and simple fact that the U.S. - led coalition (consists of 60 states, as Mr. Kerry claimed) should carefully pay attention to it. The fact is that the current Iraqi government is not an inclusive political system. In fact, part of the reason that ISIS is gaining ground in Iraq more than a devastating country like Syria, lies in this matter. The lack of inclusivity and various democratic institutions within current Iraqi government , which is the result of increasing level of Iran's influence, push the Iraqi Sunni to join ISIS. To put it simply, there are two major ongoing opposing movements in current Iraq. On the one side, the U.S. - led coalition is performing air strikes against ISIS targets in order to dismantle this terrorist group. On the other side, there are major deprived and marginalized Iraqi people, mostly Sunni people, on the ground, who are desperately joining ISIS in order to save their lives and change the current unfair status quo. In other words, we are observing two different opposed policies in current Iraq,which are functioning against each other to some extent. As such, the whole effort of the U.S. - led coalition in Iraq would not achieve its targets in an effective and appropriate manner.
In sum, when it comes to fight against ISIS, the international community needs two separate plans; one for Iraq, another one for Syria. That's true ISIS is one group and is active in both countries. But, we should bear in mind that both states of Iraq and Syria have their own special characteristics in different terms. As such, two plans are needed. When it comes to defeat ISIS in Iraq, first and important task is establishing a completely inclusive government structured by democratic institutions. Without fixing this basic and fundamental issue, you cannot / will not be able to defeat ISIS in Iraq never ever. Following this task, you should completely adjust your plan in fight against ISIS. In case of Syria, we are facing another type of problem in this matter. As such, your plan against ISIS in Syria needs a new evaluation. Simply, because you have achieved nothing in the past one and a half years ago in comparison with all resources and efforts that you have used in this matter.
M. Sirani 18.05.2015
In an interview which took place Thursday, when the reporter asked General Martin Dempsey about Iran's military operation in Iraq, the Joint Chiefs Chairman responded:
"So far, those operations haven't threatened U.S. troops or their mission" (Yahoo, 2015).
This statement is honestly shocking me. One might wonder why? This is the story. Everybody knows that the Iranian Regime has completely colonized Iraq since many years ago at least since December 2011, when the U.S. withdrew its troops from Iraq. Since 2013, ISIS has systematically begun to seize the power in Iraq and Syria. To put it simply, ISIS activities in both Iraq and Syria are threatening Iran's interests (in different terms) in both countries. Since August 2014, the USA has formed a coalition (nearly 60 countries as Mr. John Kerry says) and has begun to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. I'm wondering: why should the Iranian Regime complain? Why should the Iranian Regime perform any activity against the U.S. troops, when the U.S. troops are fighting ISIS and doing a great favor for the Iranian Regime free of any charge?
Not only Iran but also the Syrian regime are using Buck Passing Strategy and enjoying all the activities that the USA and its coalition are doing against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. What else should the Iranian Regime or Assad's Regime wish in this matter General Dempsey?
This is not the end of the story. General Dempsey surprises us with another shocking statement. In this interview, General Dempsey is identifying the Iranian influence in Iraq a positive move, if the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all different groups inside Iraq. His direct statement is as follows:
"If it is a path that ties the two countries more closely together economically or even politically, as long at the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all the various groups inside the country, then I think Iranian influence will be positive" (Yahoo, 2015).
This part of General Dempsey's statement is interesting and at the same time shocking from different angles. I'm wondering, do i have to remind the Joint Chiefs of Chairman about the destructive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq, which directly and indirectly facilitated the best environment for the emergence and presence of ISIS in both Iraq and Syria? Do i have to remind General Dempsey that hegemonic influence of the Shiite regime of Iran led most of the Sunni tribes in Iraq to join ISIS? Or do i have to remind General Dempsey that since 2003 onward, most of the U.S. troops in Iraq were killed by the IRGC, Quds forces and their affiliates such as Mahdi Army or Badr force?
Furthermore, General Dempsey has used the term "inclusivity" as a characteristic of the current Iraqi government, in order to underpin his statement about the positive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq. I don't want to deeply analyze this part of General Dempsey's statement; although there are many loopholes in this matter as well. But with help of some simple questions, i would try to illustrate my argument.
Dear General Dempsey:
1- Who is the current Iraqi Minister of Transportation? Is Hadi Al- Amiri the current minister or not? Is Hadi Al-Amiri the head of Badr Organization or not? Is the Badr Organization a subset of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or not?
2- Who is the current Iraqi Interior Minister? Is Mohammed Ghabban a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not? Needless to say that Interior Ministry is a key security ministry within every political system including current Iraqi government.
3- Who is the current Iraqi Human Rights Minister? Is Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not?
Dear General Dempsey, the Joint Chiefs of Chairman of the strongest country in the world: With just these simple examples, could we identify the current Iraqi government an inclusive political system and furthermore could we identify the overall influence of Iran in Iraq a positive move? Or should we be optimistic about the inclusivity of Iraqi government somewhere in the future?
In sum, i can offer you many other examples and a more deeper academic argument, which the combination of all of them indicates a simple fact that:
The current Iraqi government is not inclusive and never will be a inclusive political system as long as the Islamic Regime governs in Iran.
Note: If you think you can stop Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by handing over Iraq to Iran, you are absolutely and completely in the wrong direction. You will understand my statement, when it's too late. Remember my short note in this matter.
M. Sirani 09.01.2015
Reference:
http://news.yahoo.com/dempsey-us-eyes-ways-aid-iraq-forces-182531294--politics.html
This is a very clear and simple fact that the U.S. - led coalition (consists of 60 states, as Mr. Kerry claimed) should carefully pay attention to it. The fact is that the current Iraqi government is not an inclusive political system. In fact, part of the reason that ISIS is gaining ground in Iraq more than a devastating country like Syria, lies in this matter. The lack of inclusivity and various democratic institutions within current Iraqi government , which is the result of increasing level of Iran's influence, push the Iraqi Sunni to join ISIS. To put it simply, there are two major ongoing opposing movements in current Iraq. On the one side, the U.S. - led coalition is performing air strikes against ISIS targets in order to dismantle this terrorist group. On the other side, there are major deprived and marginalized Iraqi people, mostly Sunni people, on the ground, who are desperately joining ISIS in order to save their lives and change the current unfair status quo. In other words, we are observing two different opposed policies in current Iraq,which are functioning against each other to some extent. As such, the whole effort of the U.S. - led coalition in Iraq would not achieve its targets in an effective and appropriate manner.
In sum, when it comes to fight against ISIS, the international community needs two separate plans; one for Iraq, another one for Syria. That's true ISIS is one group and is active in both countries. But, we should bear in mind that both states of Iraq and Syria have their own special characteristics in different terms. As such, two plans are needed. When it comes to defeat ISIS in Iraq, first and important task is establishing a completely inclusive government structured by democratic institutions. Without fixing this basic and fundamental issue, you cannot / will not be able to defeat ISIS in Iraq never ever. Following this task, you should completely adjust your plan in fight against ISIS. In case of Syria, we are facing another type of problem in this matter. As such, your plan against ISIS in Syria needs a new evaluation. Simply, because you have achieved nothing in the past one and a half years ago in comparison with all resources and efforts that you have used in this matter.
M. Sirani 18.05.2015
Current Iraqi Government is Not Inclusive.
You Are Shocking Me General Dempsey.
In an interview which took place Thursday, when the reporter asked General Martin Dempsey about Iran's military operation in Iraq, the Joint Chiefs Chairman responded:
"So far, those operations haven't threatened U.S. troops or their mission" (Yahoo, 2015).
This statement is honestly shocking me. One might wonder why? This is the story. Everybody knows that the Iranian Regime has completely colonized Iraq since many years ago at least since December 2011, when the U.S. withdrew its troops from Iraq. Since 2013, ISIS has systematically begun to seize the power in Iraq and Syria. To put it simply, ISIS activities in both Iraq and Syria are threatening Iran's interests (in different terms) in both countries. Since August 2014, the USA has formed a coalition (nearly 60 countries as Mr. John Kerry says) and has begun to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. I'm wondering: why should the Iranian Regime complain? Why should the Iranian Regime perform any activity against the U.S. troops, when the U.S. troops are fighting ISIS and doing a great favor for the Iranian Regime free of any charge?
Not only Iran but also the Syrian regime are using Buck Passing Strategy and enjoying all the activities that the USA and its coalition are doing against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. What else should the Iranian Regime or Assad's Regime wish in this matter General Dempsey?
This is not the end of the story. General Dempsey surprises us with another shocking statement. In this interview, General Dempsey is identifying the Iranian influence in Iraq a positive move, if the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all different groups inside Iraq. His direct statement is as follows:
"If it is a path that ties the two countries more closely together economically or even politically, as long at the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all the various groups inside the country, then I think Iranian influence will be positive" (Yahoo, 2015).
This part of General Dempsey's statement is interesting and at the same time shocking from different angles. I'm wondering, do i have to remind the Joint Chiefs of Chairman about the destructive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq, which directly and indirectly facilitated the best environment for the emergence and presence of ISIS in both Iraq and Syria? Do i have to remind General Dempsey that hegemonic influence of the Shiite regime of Iran led most of the Sunni tribes in Iraq to join ISIS? Or do i have to remind General Dempsey that since 2003 onward, most of the U.S. troops in Iraq were killed by the IRGC, Quds forces and their affiliates such as Mahdi Army or Badr force?
Furthermore, General Dempsey has used the term "inclusivity" as a characteristic of the current Iraqi government, in order to underpin his statement about the positive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq. I don't want to deeply analyze this part of General Dempsey's statement; although there are many loopholes in this matter as well. But with help of some simple questions, i would try to illustrate my argument.
Dear General Dempsey:
1- Who is the current Iraqi Minister of Transportation? Is Hadi Al- Amiri the current minister or not? Is Hadi Al-Amiri the head of Badr Organization or not? Is the Badr Organization a subset of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or not?
2- Who is the current Iraqi Interior Minister? Is Mohammed Ghabban a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not? Needless to say that Interior Ministry is a key security ministry within every political system including current Iraqi government.
3- Who is the current Iraqi Human Rights Minister? Is Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not?
Dear General Dempsey, the Joint Chiefs of Chairman of the strongest country in the world: With just these simple examples, could we identify the current Iraqi government an inclusive political system and furthermore could we identify the overall influence of Iran in Iraq a positive move? Or should we be optimistic about the inclusivity of Iraqi government somewhere in the future?
In sum, i can offer you many other examples and a more deeper academic argument, which the combination of all of them indicates a simple fact that:
The current Iraqi government is not inclusive and never will be a inclusive political system as long as the Islamic Regime governs in Iran.
Note: If you think you can stop Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by handing over Iraq to Iran, you are absolutely and completely in the wrong direction. You will understand my statement, when it's too late. Remember my short note in this matter.
M. Sirani 09.01.2015
Reference:
http://news.yahoo.com/dempsey-us-eyes-ways-aid-iraq-forces-182531294--politics.html
Sunday, May 17, 2015
3 Days Yemen Peace Talks Continue in Riyadh; While the Houthis, the So Far Winner of Yemeni Civil War, Boycott the Meeting.
Briefly:
With current policy, you are just wasting your resources, destroying the whole infrastructure of the country, ruining the lives of ordinary Yemeni people and nothing else. Whether you like or not, your plan with regards to current tension in Yemen needs a fundamental change and adjustment; before its too late. Otherwise, be prepared for a Libyan scenario in Yemen with an additional powerful actor i.e. the Houthis backed by Iran, somewhere in the near future.
M. Sirani 17.05.2015
With current policy, you are just wasting your resources, destroying the whole infrastructure of the country, ruining the lives of ordinary Yemeni people and nothing else. Whether you like or not, your plan with regards to current tension in Yemen needs a fundamental change and adjustment; before its too late. Otherwise, be prepared for a Libyan scenario in Yemen with an additional powerful actor i.e. the Houthis backed by Iran, somewhere in the near future.
M. Sirani 17.05.2015
Saturday, May 16, 2015
Modern Slavery in Qatar. Should We Close Our Eyes to The Clear Violation of Human Rights in Qatar Because of the World Cup or Oil or Economic Trade?
Briefly:
This is a very heartbreaking news:
1- When i hear that Nepalese construction workers should work in a rich-oil country like Qatar with such a harsh weather for just $220 dollars per month.
2- When i hear that some of these Nepalese workers cannot return back to their country to help their families at this critical moment following the recent earthquake, because they are still in debt to some blood sucker individual or company because of recruitment fees.
Isn't this a modern slavery? Who is responsible in this matter? Which entity or organization can / should help these Nepalese workers that currently are trapped in Qatar? What is the responsibility of UN, LO, ILO, FIFA and other human rights organizations in this matter? Shouldn't we globally find a solution for this inhuman event? or Should we close our eyes to this harsh violation of human rights in Qatar because of the World Cup or oil-gas or some other economic trade?
M. Sirani 16.05.2015
Reference:
Watching your country collapse from afar.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/15/watching-your-country-collapse-from-afar-nepal-qatar-earthquake/?utm_content=buffer97d7d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Friday, May 15, 2015
Russia Planning Legislation to Brand Foreign NGOs as Undesirable (Russia's Decision in This Matter is Inevitable Based on Copenhagen School of Thought).
Briefly:
Based on 'Copenhagen School Approach'(developed by: B. Buzan, O. Wæver, J. De Wilde), this move of Russia is inevitable. This is a simple thing that all western, Ukrainian and Russian civil society, grassroots, human rights organizations and activists should pay attention to it.
As long as the tension in Ukraine intensifies, Russian authority undoubtedly limits the scope and level of activities of all civil society movements in Russia and in the western part of Ukraine; of course, if it would be able to do.
Note: Hope some organization like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Norwegian Helsinki Committee and alike have deeper understanding about this approach, its correlation and effect with regards to current tension between Russia and The West amid Ukraine.
*** I don't have time to explore this school of thought in this short note. But Briefly: As much as you (the western countries and organizations) push Russia with regards to current tension in Ukraine, you are, by your own hands, facilitating the best opportunity for Russian authority to limit the activity or completely shut down the activity of various civil society, grassroots or humanitarian organization in Russia (Securitization & Politicization) , due to some artificially fabricated security measures. I'm pretty sure, some of you have done lots of damages in this matter to your own activities in Russia or any other undemocratic states so far, due to the lack of proper knowledge to this approach and alike. But it would be wise to consider this school of though, when you are designing any plan in any undemocratic political system including in Russia and Ukraine. This simply means, you should design your plan in a very smart and professional manner in a way that: 1- you should be able to continue with your positive activities under the control of an undemocratic system in an appropriate and effective manner and 2- while you don't facilitate an opportunity for that undemocratic system to limit your activity. I know this is a very tricky and sensitive point. But it is not an impossible mission.
Fore more details: your policy makers can google: Copenhagen School Approach (in International Relations) developed by Barry. Buzan, Ole. Wæver, and Jaap. De Wilde.
M. Sirani 15.05.2015
Based on 'Copenhagen School Approach'(developed by: B. Buzan, O. Wæver, J. De Wilde), this move of Russia is inevitable. This is a simple thing that all western, Ukrainian and Russian civil society, grassroots, human rights organizations and activists should pay attention to it.
As long as the tension in Ukraine intensifies, Russian authority undoubtedly limits the scope and level of activities of all civil society movements in Russia and in the western part of Ukraine; of course, if it would be able to do.
Note: Hope some organization like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Norwegian Helsinki Committee and alike have deeper understanding about this approach, its correlation and effect with regards to current tension between Russia and The West amid Ukraine.
*** I don't have time to explore this school of thought in this short note. But Briefly: As much as you (the western countries and organizations) push Russia with regards to current tension in Ukraine, you are, by your own hands, facilitating the best opportunity for Russian authority to limit the activity or completely shut down the activity of various civil society, grassroots or humanitarian organization in Russia (Securitization & Politicization) , due to some artificially fabricated security measures. I'm pretty sure, some of you have done lots of damages in this matter to your own activities in Russia or any other undemocratic states so far, due to the lack of proper knowledge to this approach and alike. But it would be wise to consider this school of though, when you are designing any plan in any undemocratic political system including in Russia and Ukraine. This simply means, you should design your plan in a very smart and professional manner in a way that: 1- you should be able to continue with your positive activities under the control of an undemocratic system in an appropriate and effective manner and 2- while you don't facilitate an opportunity for that undemocratic system to limit your activity. I know this is a very tricky and sensitive point. But it is not an impossible mission.
Fore more details: your policy makers can google: Copenhagen School Approach (in International Relations) developed by Barry. Buzan, Ole. Wæver, and Jaap. De Wilde.
M. Sirani 15.05.2015
ISIS is Capturing Iraqi City of Ramadi. (As A. Einstein said: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity).
After more than one and a half years effort of U.S.- led coalition (more than 60 states, as Mr. Kerry publicly announced), ISIS is gaining the ground in Ramadi; a city about 110 kilometer west of Baghdad.
Note: As A. Einstein said: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity. Does the U.S. - led coalition need more than one and half years time to seriously understand that its plan against ISIS is inappropriate and inefficient?
M. Sirani 15.05.2015
Note: As A. Einstein said: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity. Does the U.S. - led coalition need more than one and half years time to seriously understand that its plan against ISIS is inappropriate and inefficient?
Thursday, May 14, 2015
Obama-Kerry-Moniz are in the Real Trouble.
Nearly 400 members of the U.S. House of representatives passed the bill to review any nuclear deal with Iran.
M. Sirani 14.05.2015
M. Sirani 14.05.2015
The Chaotic, Weak and Wrong Foreign Policy of Obama Administration Would Nuclearise the Whole Middle East.(The Historical Legacy of President Obama).
Saudi Arabia declared openly and publicly: We want what Iran gets.
Before too long, Qatar, UAE, Egypt, possibly Kuwait and Turkey would try to have nuclear capability. This is the starting point to say good bye to peace and stability in the whole Middle East, North Africa and consequently the whole Africa.
Note: This is the historical legacy of President Obama.
M. Sirani 14.05.2015
Before too long, Qatar, UAE, Egypt, possibly Kuwait and Turkey would try to have nuclear capability. This is the starting point to say good bye to peace and stability in the whole Middle East, North Africa and consequently the whole Africa.
Note: This is the historical legacy of President Obama.
M. Sirani 14.05.2015
Czechs Blocked Potential Nuclear Tech Purchase By Iran, While Obama-Kerry-Moniz Would Try to Sell a Delusional Weak Nuclear Deal With Iran to the International Community.
When it comes to the Islamic Regime of Iran, some words such as verification, accountability, transparency or credibility are just some jokes. Thus, delude yourself as much as you want, but do not insult my intelligence.
Reference:
Reuters:
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/14/us-iran-nuclear-czech-exclusive-idUSKBN0NY2K720150514
M. Sirani 14.05.2015
Reference:
Reuters:
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/14/us-iran-nuclear-czech-exclusive-idUSKBN0NY2K720150514
M. Sirani 14.05.2015
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
Iran’s Aid Ship Will Arrive in Yemeni Al-Hudaydah Port Next Tue or Wed; Depends on the Weather, Nearly 7 Days from Today (13.05.2015).
Many officials in Tehran have openly and publicly stated that the ship will not go to Djibouti and Iran will not allow any foreign troop inspect the ship. Would Iranian officials change their mind in these matters in the next six or seven days or not is really unknown at this stage; at least for me. Many factors mainly the position of Hothis in the Yemeni civil war play important role in this matter.
As i have briefly explained in some of my previous short note, there is low probability that Iran would start a direct military confrontation with Saudi-led coalition because of Yemen at least at this stage. Regarding Iran's aid ship, maybe in the final stage, Iran would allow a neutral body, for example, UN inspectors check the ship. By such a move, Iran projects its power and at the same time ease the tension for a military confrontation with Saudi-led coalition, to some extent. However, there is always risk for a horrific accident in such a critical situation.
M. Sirani 13.05.2015
As i have briefly explained in some of my previous short note, there is low probability that Iran would start a direct military confrontation with Saudi-led coalition because of Yemen at least at this stage. Regarding Iran's aid ship, maybe in the final stage, Iran would allow a neutral body, for example, UN inspectors check the ship. By such a move, Iran projects its power and at the same time ease the tension for a military confrontation with Saudi-led coalition, to some extent. However, there is always risk for a horrific accident in such a critical situation.
M. Sirani 13.05.2015
EU New Plan Aims to Bring 20,000 Refugees To Europe in the Next Two Years.
I'm wondering how do the European decision makers evaluate the migrant crisis? How would the EU be able to limit the number of refugees at a rate of 20,000 people? What type of leverage/s do the EU have to keep the number of refugees at this chosen number? Are the EU policy makers aware that the flux of migrants is an inevitable event beyond the will, power and authority of the Union? How long would the EU want to continue with such a weak and ineffective plan with regards to a great humanitarian disaster like migrant crisis?
Note: The EU policy makers should be prepared for many more refugees, more than this number they have chosen; due to the fact that the situation in the whole Middle East and North Africa will getting worse than what we are observing currently, in the next coming months and years. As such, it would be wise that EU would try to address the migrant crisis in a more effective, professional, comprehensive, fundamental and long term manner. Otherwise, the Union will inevitably be surprised from different angles.
M. Sirani 13.05.2015
Note: The EU policy makers should be prepared for many more refugees, more than this number they have chosen; due to the fact that the situation in the whole Middle East and North Africa will getting worse than what we are observing currently, in the next coming months and years. As such, it would be wise that EU would try to address the migrant crisis in a more effective, professional, comprehensive, fundamental and long term manner. Otherwise, the Union will inevitably be surprised from different angles.
M. Sirani 13.05.2015
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
It's Funny & Meaningful: In Return to Idaho's Potatoes, John Kerry Received a T-Shirt Signed Victory and A Basket of Tomato From Sergej Lavrov. What Do These Gifts Mean?
Hope the U.S. and EU politicians including Mrs. Nuland pay attention to meaning and intention of this type of diplomatic language. loool
Note: Instead of using the F****** words, S. Lavrov gave a T-Shirt signed with a big V (means victory) and a basket of tomato. ( as you know tomato can be used in kitchen and somewhere else e.g during a protest). This is a type of modern & polite diplomatic language loool
M. Sirani 12.05.2015
Note: Instead of using the F****** words, S. Lavrov gave a T-Shirt signed with a big V (means victory) and a basket of tomato. ( as you know tomato can be used in kitchen and somewhere else e.g during a protest). This is a type of modern & polite diplomatic language loool
M. Sirani 12.05.2015
Be Prepared For Series of Unpredictable Changes and Tensions.
Briefly:
A series of unpredictable changes and tensions, much bigger, deeper and broader than what we are observing currently, are underway in the whole Middle East and North Africa in the next coming months and years. The consequences and side effects would undoubtedly impact the whole international community in different terms and scales.
Note: I assume some current 'genius politicians and their highly clever advisers' know about these events. So, needless to explore the details of coming hurricanes in this simple-grade weblog.
M. Sirani 12.05.2015
A series of unpredictable changes and tensions, much bigger, deeper and broader than what we are observing currently, are underway in the whole Middle East and North Africa in the next coming months and years. The consequences and side effects would undoubtedly impact the whole international community in different terms and scales.
Note: I assume some current 'genius politicians and their highly clever advisers' know about these events. So, needless to explore the details of coming hurricanes in this simple-grade weblog.
M. Sirani 12.05.2015
U.S. - China Renewal Nuclear Cooperation Agreement; Another Example of Chaotic Foreign Policy of Obama Administration.
Briefly:
Each year, the USA is selling billions of dollars weapons and military equipment to South Asian countries. In addition, the USA along with its close allies are regularly conducting huge and costly military maneuvers in South Asian international waters. Moreover, some of the South Asian countries are the host of the U.S. military bases since some decades ago. All these events, which impose huge burden on South Asian countries in different terms, would occur, in order that the U.S. allies in that part of the world be able to defend themselves against the so-called potential 'aggression and hegemonic expansionist behavior' of both North Korea and China, each from different angles and scales.
Up until this point, we might close our eyes to the truth or untruth, fairness or unfairness of these accusations by claiming that the U.S. is a super power and by these types of moves, the country would try to preserve and maintain the security and interests of itself and its close allies in South East Asia against any potential threat; in this particular case: China and North Korea.
This issue would, however, would be controversial, when we briefly explore the details of renewal nuclear cooperation agreement between the Obama administration and China. According to this deal, China would be allowed to buy new American-designed nuclear reactors, technology to reprocess plutonium from used fuel and reactor cooling system technology, as the media reveal. Some of these modern equipment and new technologies, as experts claim, might/can be used in nuclear military
dimension.
This issue raises some serious questions, which Obama administration and the U.S. close allies in South East Asia should carefully pay attention to them. These questions are as follows:
1- Is China a serious threat (in different terms) for U.S. and its close allies in South East Asia or not?
2- If China is a serious threat for U.S. and its close allies, then why on earth is the Obama administration intending to sell modern & sensitive nuclear equipment and technology to China?
3- If China is not a serious threat (as the nuclear deal between U.S. and China also clearly shows), then why should the South East Asian countries spend billions of dollars for U.S. made weapons, military equipment, the U.S. military bases and costly military maneuvers regularly / annually in order to defend themselves against China?
4- If China is not a serious enemy as this deal and the broad economic relationship between China and U.S. also illustrate; then, shouldn't we mainly demilitarize the South East Asia? Or should we artificially fabricate an enemy somewhere around the globe including in South East Asia in order to have a fat market for our military weapons and equipment?
5- More importantly is the close relationship and cooperation between various governmental and private Chinese sectors with their counterparts in some countries such as Iran, Pakistan and North Korea. How would Obama administration give a guarantee to the international community that some of these highly important nuclear equipment and technology would not be transferred from China to those unstable and revisionist states somehow, somewhere in the future?
6- Should we call this completely economic driven move of Obama administration a 'double-crossing foreign policy' or not? A type of 'the end justifies the means'.
Don't misunderstand me in this matter. I'm strongly a proponent of a world without (Weapons of Mass Destruction) WMD including nuclear weapon. As such, i fully support any positive nuclear agreement between the current nuclear-armed countries including this one between the U.S. and China. The reason behind my logical argument is the fact that such a deal and alike would preserve peace and stability in the international arena and to some extent prevent a possible nuclear war between the super powers at least for a while. Moreover, I don't identify the Obama administration or current political system in China as my enemies; although, i might criticize the policies of both political systems in some occasion. My point in this short note was to illustrate another chaotic, contradictory and controversial move of the Obama administration in terms of foreign policy with regards to China.
Note: No wonders some of the leaders in the Middle East do not trust Obama administration anymore, That's why some of them didn't attend the current Camp David summit organized by the White House. Without any doubt, i can say part of the current conflicts in various parts of the Middle East stem from chaotic foreign policy of Obama administration.
M. Sirani 12.05.2015
Each year, the USA is selling billions of dollars weapons and military equipment to South Asian countries. In addition, the USA along with its close allies are regularly conducting huge and costly military maneuvers in South Asian international waters. Moreover, some of the South Asian countries are the host of the U.S. military bases since some decades ago. All these events, which impose huge burden on South Asian countries in different terms, would occur, in order that the U.S. allies in that part of the world be able to defend themselves against the so-called potential 'aggression and hegemonic expansionist behavior' of both North Korea and China, each from different angles and scales.
Up until this point, we might close our eyes to the truth or untruth, fairness or unfairness of these accusations by claiming that the U.S. is a super power and by these types of moves, the country would try to preserve and maintain the security and interests of itself and its close allies in South East Asia against any potential threat; in this particular case: China and North Korea.
This issue would, however, would be controversial, when we briefly explore the details of renewal nuclear cooperation agreement between the Obama administration and China. According to this deal, China would be allowed to buy new American-designed nuclear reactors, technology to reprocess plutonium from used fuel and reactor cooling system technology, as the media reveal. Some of these modern equipment and new technologies, as experts claim, might/can be used in nuclear military
dimension.
This issue raises some serious questions, which Obama administration and the U.S. close allies in South East Asia should carefully pay attention to them. These questions are as follows:
1- Is China a serious threat (in different terms) for U.S. and its close allies in South East Asia or not?
2- If China is a serious threat for U.S. and its close allies, then why on earth is the Obama administration intending to sell modern & sensitive nuclear equipment and technology to China?
3- If China is not a serious threat (as the nuclear deal between U.S. and China also clearly shows), then why should the South East Asian countries spend billions of dollars for U.S. made weapons, military equipment, the U.S. military bases and costly military maneuvers regularly / annually in order to defend themselves against China?
4- If China is not a serious enemy as this deal and the broad economic relationship between China and U.S. also illustrate; then, shouldn't we mainly demilitarize the South East Asia? Or should we artificially fabricate an enemy somewhere around the globe including in South East Asia in order to have a fat market for our military weapons and equipment?
5- More importantly is the close relationship and cooperation between various governmental and private Chinese sectors with their counterparts in some countries such as Iran, Pakistan and North Korea. How would Obama administration give a guarantee to the international community that some of these highly important nuclear equipment and technology would not be transferred from China to those unstable and revisionist states somehow, somewhere in the future?
6- Should we call this completely economic driven move of Obama administration a 'double-crossing foreign policy' or not? A type of 'the end justifies the means'.
Note: No wonders some of the leaders in the Middle East do not trust Obama administration anymore, That's why some of them didn't attend the current Camp David summit organized by the White House. Without any doubt, i can say part of the current conflicts in various parts of the Middle East stem from chaotic foreign policy of Obama administration.
M. Sirani 12.05.2015
Monday, May 11, 2015
Using and Implementing the Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter With Regards to Libya (Whole Country) is Completely Wrong Policy and Counterproductive.
If this plan (Chapter 7) would be performed in the whole country of Libya, the result would be a huge humanitarian disaster in Libya. In addition, the consequences of this plan would undoubtedly destabilize all the neighboring countries of Libya each from different scales and angles.
Note: If the EU would try to use the Chapter 7 UN Charter and perform a series of military intervention in the whole country of Libya, the result would be a huge and prolonged humanitarian disaster in various forms much worse than all issues mentioned in my previous short note. Such a scenario, in addition, would cause a conflict between the EU and some of the Arab countries. Due to the fact that the EU would try to support a special group or groups of Libyan people through this military intervention on the one hand and some of the Arab countries would support other group/s of the Libyan on the other hand. To put it simply, the EU and some of the Arab countries would inter into a type of proxy war against each other in Libya; of course, in case of a broad military intervention in the whole country of Libya.
M. Sirani 11.05.2015
Note: If the EU would try to use the Chapter 7 UN Charter and perform a series of military intervention in the whole country of Libya, the result would be a huge and prolonged humanitarian disaster in various forms much worse than all issues mentioned in my previous short note. Such a scenario, in addition, would cause a conflict between the EU and some of the Arab countries. Due to the fact that the EU would try to support a special group or groups of Libyan people through this military intervention on the one hand and some of the Arab countries would support other group/s of the Libyan on the other hand. To put it simply, the EU and some of the Arab countries would inter into a type of proxy war against each other in Libya; of course, in case of a broad military intervention in the whole country of Libya.
M. Sirani 11.05.2015
Sunday, May 10, 2015
Warning: EU New Plan For Military Attacks on Libyan Coasts to Stop Migrant Boats is Totally Wrong, Ineffective and Counterproductive.
Briefly:
The EU has designed a plan for military attacks on the trafficking networks in the Libyan Coasts in order to prevent the flux of migration. The plan will be discussed in the UN on Monday in order to secure a UN mandate in this matter. In case of approval, there is high probability that once again, NATO will be involved in this military mission.
This plan is totally wrong, ineffective and counterproductive based on the following reasons.
1- The EU and NATO should understand that their totally wrong and unjustified military intervention dragged Libya into the current disaster. This, however, does not mean that i'm defending the undemocratic government of Qaddafi. My point in this matter is to remind the EU policy makers that in every plan and policy, in addition to the short & long term benefit, they should think about the negative consequences and side effects of their plan.
2- All migrants that cross the Mediterranean Sea and enter to EU zone are not just Libyan citizens. There are millions migrants not only from Libya but also from other Middle Eastern and African countries that are waiting for a simple opportunity to reach the EU zone from every where they can.
3- This is a fact that the current failed state of Libya is a solid platform for the traffickers. But Libya is not the only platform in this matter. There are other active platforms, for example, in Turkey, Greece, Malta, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria. What would the EU & NATO do with these platforms? Would the EU & NATO forces want to expand their military mission to these platforms, in order to prevent the flux of migrants?!
4- The EU & NATO forces might be able to secure the Libyan coasts and consequently reduce the flux of migrant boats for a while. The questions is: How long would the EU & NATO forces be able to continue with this huge and costly military mission in the Libyan coasts? How many days, weeks, months?
5- What would the traffickers do, when they observe that the Libyan coasts are nearly insecure? Do these military missions entirely stop the traffickers in what they do or this military operation would encourage the traffickers to change their location to another safe platform/s? In such a case, what would the EU & NATO do?
6- What would the desperate migrants do, when they observe that the Libyan coasts are insecure for crossing? Do the migrants remain in their unsafe, insecure and dangerous countries of origin to die gradually due to this military operation or would they inevitably choose another platform for departure?
7- What about the collateral damages and total destruction (e.g. honest Libyan fishermen and their boats) as the inevitable results of these military operations? Who, which state or which entity will be responsible in this matter?
8- Assume the EU & NATO succeed in this mission (Which i strongly doubt about it), what about those desperate and in urgent need migrants that have left their countries in order to find a safe haven to live? What is the moral and ethical responsibility of the EU & NATO members in this matter?
9- It should be added that any military intervention on Libya (depends on the scale of intervention) would undoubtedly create and cause extra problem and instability in different terms not only in Libya but also for all the neighboring countries around Libya to some extent. In this respect, Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Chad and Niger, as the most vulnerable states, could be mentioned. Moreover, the military intervention in Libya would undoubtedly threaten the EU in terms of security and safety matters as well. The military intervention would inevitably provoke all the terrorist groups across the Middle East and Africa. As such, the move would consequently function as a driving force and a type of wake up call for all the hibernated lone wolves across the EU. To put it simply, by performing such a wrong military move, the EU & NATO members are putting the security and safety of their citizens at a severe risk. This is an important issue that the EU strategists & decision makers should carefully pay attention to it.
Important 10- If the EU would try to use the Chapter 7 UN Charter and perform a series of military intervention in the whole country of Libya, the result would be a huge and prolonged humanitarian disaster in various forms much worse than all issues mentioned above. Such a scenario, in addition, would cause a conflict between the EU and some of the Arab countries. Due to the fact that the EU would try to support a special group or groups of Libyan people through this military intervention on the one hand and some of the Arab countries would support other group/s of the Libyan on the other hand. To put it simply, the EU and some of the Arab countries would inter into a type of proxy war against each other in Libya; of course, in case of a broad military intervention in the whole country of Libya.
And many other questions and complications in this regard.
Based on all explained above, i believe the new proposal of EU in this matter is totally wrong, ineffective and counterproductive.
Note: The EU proposal cannot prevent the flux of migrants, but the plan would achieve a certain goal; i'm pretty sure it does. The EU plan can establish a secure passage line for the ship tankers that transport the Libyan oil to the EU. By this move, the EU would try to decrease its dependency to the Russian oil. This would be the only achievement of the EU new plan under the name of "Saving Migrants Lives" and nothing else.
On Monday, the UN (Probably the Security Council) will discuss this plan. China would probably ignore this plan and does not use the veto power due to its neutrality and nonintervention policy. There is high probability that Federica Mogherini has discussed this issue with her counterpart during her recent visit to China and has received a type of green light from Beijing. Russia is another actor, which can veto this proposal within the UN Security Council. But it might not do it, because the country would try to ease the tension with the Western countries amid the current tension in Ukraine. Part of the reason, that Angela Merkel is visiting Russia today, might be understood in this respect. In sum, the EU plan might probably be approved and authorized within the UN Security Council and consequently a new disastrous chapter in the Libyan history would begin in the next coming days & weeks. This is the real face of our contemporary useless international institutions, laws and conventions.
Contrary to this ineffective and counterproductive plan, the UN can impose sanction on the Libyan oil. By using this leverage along with other necessary measures, for example freezing the Libyan assets, the international community can force the Libyan domestic actors to compromise and form an inclusive political system. This is not an easy task, but it is not an impossible mission as well. When it comes to Syria and some other conflictual areas such as Ukraine are still some solutions. But as it appears, the UN, the EU and the U.S. are not really eager to solve these problems in a very fundamental and professional manners. The current policies of UN, EU and USA in these matters is similar to some doctors, who have visited a cancer patient and have decided to treat the patient with some paracetamol.
M. Sirani 10.05.2015
The EU has designed a plan for military attacks on the trafficking networks in the Libyan Coasts in order to prevent the flux of migration. The plan will be discussed in the UN on Monday in order to secure a UN mandate in this matter. In case of approval, there is high probability that once again, NATO will be involved in this military mission.
This plan is totally wrong, ineffective and counterproductive based on the following reasons.
1- The EU and NATO should understand that their totally wrong and unjustified military intervention dragged Libya into the current disaster. This, however, does not mean that i'm defending the undemocratic government of Qaddafi. My point in this matter is to remind the EU policy makers that in every plan and policy, in addition to the short & long term benefit, they should think about the negative consequences and side effects of their plan.
2- All migrants that cross the Mediterranean Sea and enter to EU zone are not just Libyan citizens. There are millions migrants not only from Libya but also from other Middle Eastern and African countries that are waiting for a simple opportunity to reach the EU zone from every where they can.
3- This is a fact that the current failed state of Libya is a solid platform for the traffickers. But Libya is not the only platform in this matter. There are other active platforms, for example, in Turkey, Greece, Malta, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria. What would the EU & NATO do with these platforms? Would the EU & NATO forces want to expand their military mission to these platforms, in order to prevent the flux of migrants?!
4- The EU & NATO forces might be able to secure the Libyan coasts and consequently reduce the flux of migrant boats for a while. The questions is: How long would the EU & NATO forces be able to continue with this huge and costly military mission in the Libyan coasts? How many days, weeks, months?
5- What would the traffickers do, when they observe that the Libyan coasts are nearly insecure? Do these military missions entirely stop the traffickers in what they do or this military operation would encourage the traffickers to change their location to another safe platform/s? In such a case, what would the EU & NATO do?
6- What would the desperate migrants do, when they observe that the Libyan coasts are insecure for crossing? Do the migrants remain in their unsafe, insecure and dangerous countries of origin to die gradually due to this military operation or would they inevitably choose another platform for departure?
7- What about the collateral damages and total destruction (e.g. honest Libyan fishermen and their boats) as the inevitable results of these military operations? Who, which state or which entity will be responsible in this matter?
9- It should be added that any military intervention on Libya (depends on the scale of intervention) would undoubtedly create and cause extra problem and instability in different terms not only in Libya but also for all the neighboring countries around Libya to some extent. In this respect, Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Chad and Niger, as the most vulnerable states, could be mentioned. Moreover, the military intervention in Libya would undoubtedly threaten the EU in terms of security and safety matters as well. The military intervention would inevitably provoke all the terrorist groups across the Middle East and Africa. As such, the move would consequently function as a driving force and a type of wake up call for all the hibernated lone wolves across the EU. To put it simply, by performing such a wrong military move, the EU & NATO members are putting the security and safety of their citizens at a severe risk. This is an important issue that the EU strategists & decision makers should carefully pay attention to it.
Important 10- If the EU would try to use the Chapter 7 UN Charter and perform a series of military intervention in the whole country of Libya, the result would be a huge and prolonged humanitarian disaster in various forms much worse than all issues mentioned above. Such a scenario, in addition, would cause a conflict between the EU and some of the Arab countries. Due to the fact that the EU would try to support a special group or groups of Libyan people through this military intervention on the one hand and some of the Arab countries would support other group/s of the Libyan on the other hand. To put it simply, the EU and some of the Arab countries would inter into a type of proxy war against each other in Libya; of course, in case of a broad military intervention in the whole country of Libya.
And many other questions and complications in this regard.
Based on all explained above, i believe the new proposal of EU in this matter is totally wrong, ineffective and counterproductive.
Note: The EU proposal cannot prevent the flux of migrants, but the plan would achieve a certain goal; i'm pretty sure it does. The EU plan can establish a secure passage line for the ship tankers that transport the Libyan oil to the EU. By this move, the EU would try to decrease its dependency to the Russian oil. This would be the only achievement of the EU new plan under the name of "Saving Migrants Lives" and nothing else.
On Monday, the UN (Probably the Security Council) will discuss this plan. China would probably ignore this plan and does not use the veto power due to its neutrality and nonintervention policy. There is high probability that Federica Mogherini has discussed this issue with her counterpart during her recent visit to China and has received a type of green light from Beijing. Russia is another actor, which can veto this proposal within the UN Security Council. But it might not do it, because the country would try to ease the tension with the Western countries amid the current tension in Ukraine. Part of the reason, that Angela Merkel is visiting Russia today, might be understood in this respect. In sum, the EU plan might probably be approved and authorized within the UN Security Council and consequently a new disastrous chapter in the Libyan history would begin in the next coming days & weeks. This is the real face of our contemporary useless international institutions, laws and conventions.
Contrary to this ineffective and counterproductive plan, the UN can impose sanction on the Libyan oil. By using this leverage along with other necessary measures, for example freezing the Libyan assets, the international community can force the Libyan domestic actors to compromise and form an inclusive political system. This is not an easy task, but it is not an impossible mission as well. When it comes to Syria and some other conflictual areas such as Ukraine are still some solutions. But as it appears, the UN, the EU and the U.S. are not really eager to solve these problems in a very fundamental and professional manners. The current policies of UN, EU and USA in these matters is similar to some doctors, who have visited a cancer patient and have decided to treat the patient with some paracetamol.
M. Sirani 10.05.2015
Saturday, May 9, 2015
A Progressive Move: China Will Establish A Military Base in A Strategic Port of Djibouti.
Briefly:
Djibouti is already home to US, France and Japanese bases. China will soon join the club in order to preserve its short and long term interests in the strategic locations of Red Sea, the Suez canal and the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb. By this move, in addition, China will gradually pave the way for its future moves from a closed country like Ethiopia toward the open sea through Djibouti. This is a progressive move in different terms not only for China but also consequently for BRICS group, at least in the long term.
Note: When it comes to the presence of foreign actors in Djibouti one thing is nearly invisible. That is the shadowy, quiet and progressively presence of the Islamic Regime of Iran. This is an important issue, which should neither be ignored nor underestimated.
M. Sirani 09.05.2015
Djibouti is already home to US, France and Japanese bases. China will soon join the club in order to preserve its short and long term interests in the strategic locations of Red Sea, the Suez canal and the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb. By this move, in addition, China will gradually pave the way for its future moves from a closed country like Ethiopia toward the open sea through Djibouti. This is a progressive move in different terms not only for China but also consequently for BRICS group, at least in the long term.
Note: When it comes to the presence of foreign actors in Djibouti one thing is nearly invisible. That is the shadowy, quiet and progressively presence of the Islamic Regime of Iran. This is an important issue, which should neither be ignored nor underestimated.
M. Sirani 09.05.2015
Friday, May 8, 2015
Taliban Opened Political Office in Qatar just A Few Days Ago. Today,the Terrorist Group Downed A Military Helicopter Carrying Foreign Diplomats.
A Pakistani military helicopter was shot down by an anti-aircraft missile in North Part of Pakistan. The Taliban has claimed the responsibility of this horrific and barbaric act. In this terrorist act, many foreign envoys including the ambassadors of Norway and Philippine have been killed.
This is a sad event not only for Norway or Philippine but also for the entire international community. This sad event should raise some serious questions for us.
1- How long should we continue to deal with a terrorist group like Taliban in an unprofessional and illogical manner?
2- How long should we unreasonably and illogically make up a monstrous group like Taliban and pretend that this terrorist group is moving toward reformation, tolerance and democratic values?
3- How many more innocent people, whether Afghans, Pakistani or foreigners, should we sacrifice to understand that it is the time that we should fundamentally get rid of such a terrorist group and its barbaric ideology?
4- How many innocent people should we sacrifice to understand that our appeasement and apologist policy toward this terrorist group do not function at all?
Note: Enough is enough. This is the time that we should leave aside some shallow and delusional academic jargon in this matter (e.g. Department N**** at Norwegian University****) and put an end to this barbaric terrorist group in both Afghanistan and Pakistan in a very comprehensive, professional and fundamental manner. This sad event shows that your policy & plan with regards to North Waziristan and Taliban are totally wrong and counterproductive; your plan needs a serious reevaluation, if you tolerate critics. I hope the Norwegian authority and the rest of the international community take the serious measures in this matter.
***I don't want to mention any name but Some might remember that four years ago, i warned about wrong and counter-productivity of some policy with regards to Taliban and North Waziristan program.
M. Sirani 08.05.2015
This is a sad event not only for Norway or Philippine but also for the entire international community. This sad event should raise some serious questions for us.
1- How long should we continue to deal with a terrorist group like Taliban in an unprofessional and illogical manner?
2- How long should we unreasonably and illogically make up a monstrous group like Taliban and pretend that this terrorist group is moving toward reformation, tolerance and democratic values?
3- How many more innocent people, whether Afghans, Pakistani or foreigners, should we sacrifice to understand that it is the time that we should fundamentally get rid of such a terrorist group and its barbaric ideology?
4- How many innocent people should we sacrifice to understand that our appeasement and apologist policy toward this terrorist group do not function at all?
Note: Enough is enough. This is the time that we should leave aside some shallow and delusional academic jargon in this matter (e.g. Department N**** at Norwegian University****) and put an end to this barbaric terrorist group in both Afghanistan and Pakistan in a very comprehensive, professional and fundamental manner. This sad event shows that your policy & plan with regards to North Waziristan and Taliban are totally wrong and counterproductive; your plan needs a serious reevaluation, if you tolerate critics. I hope the Norwegian authority and the rest of the international community take the serious measures in this matter.
***I don't want to mention any name but Some might remember that four years ago, i warned about wrong and counter-productivity of some policy with regards to Taliban and North Waziristan program.
M. Sirani 08.05.2015
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Iranian Ship (2500 Tons Humanitarian Aid & Disaster Relief) is Preparing To Move Toward Yemen (As Iran Claims).
Is there any weapon or military equipment in this ship, which port this ship is heading and how the Houthis would get the humanitarian aid are all unknown.
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
When it Comes to Yemen and the Role of Iran in This Country: You Are Too Late, Too Short, Too Ineffective At This Stage.
Iran penetrated and strengthened its influence in many places including in Yemen; while you were / are in the hibernation mode.
Note: The first thing you should do is to face to the reality.
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
Note: The first thing you should do is to face to the reality.
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
Once Again, Iran's Hostage Taking Policy Won. The U.S. Navy Halted Protection Mission in the Strait of Hormuz; Iran is Releasing Seized Danish Ship.
Those foreign companies that are enthusiastically waiting to invest in Iran following the emerging nuclear deal and lifting the sanctions, should remember this event and alike.
Note: If you stuck in Iran based on any reason no matter what, God cannot help you.
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
Note: If you stuck in Iran based on any reason no matter what, God cannot help you.
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
The Yemeni Officials Urged UN for a Swift Ground Intervention in the Country.
Briefly:
Any ground intervention, no matter performed by Saudi-led coalition, or the UN Peacekeeping forces or well-equipped army of a powerful country like the USA, at this stage (i emphasize at this stage) in Yemen, will end up in a huge fiasco based on many reasons. Considering many factors, the Yemeni war is worse than other current wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.
Note: Whether we like it or not, it's too late for a humanitarian intervention in Yemen. However, before the whole country plunge into more chaos / humanitarian catastrophe / total destruction and consequently become a completely safe haven, training center and suitable platform for every radical Islamic groups across the region, we should find a diplomatic solution for Yemen.
The only reliable and achievable solution in this matter at this critical stage is a type of compromise between Yemeni Shiite and Sunni groups; whether we like it or not. Timing is an important factor in this matter as well. We should bear in mind that we might lose this opportunity somewhere in the near future, if the Houthis would get the upper hand and seize more control in Yemen. The UN should act immediately; before it's too late.
***The Saudi policy makers should have predicted this difficult position in the beginning. Every decision based on emotional image would lead to a disaster, specially when the decision is related to an important issue such as the international politics.
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
Any ground intervention, no matter performed by Saudi-led coalition, or the UN Peacekeeping forces or well-equipped army of a powerful country like the USA, at this stage (i emphasize at this stage) in Yemen, will end up in a huge fiasco based on many reasons. Considering many factors, the Yemeni war is worse than other current wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.
Note: Whether we like it or not, it's too late for a humanitarian intervention in Yemen. However, before the whole country plunge into more chaos / humanitarian catastrophe / total destruction and consequently become a completely safe haven, training center and suitable platform for every radical Islamic groups across the region, we should find a diplomatic solution for Yemen.
The only reliable and achievable solution in this matter at this critical stage is a type of compromise between Yemeni Shiite and Sunni groups; whether we like it or not. Timing is an important factor in this matter as well. We should bear in mind that we might lose this opportunity somewhere in the near future, if the Houthis would get the upper hand and seize more control in Yemen. The UN should act immediately; before it's too late.
***The Saudi policy makers should have predicted this difficult position in the beginning. Every decision based on emotional image would lead to a disaster, specially when the decision is related to an important issue such as the international politics.
M. Sirani 07.05.2015
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Keeping Away the Iranian Planes is Something. But How Would You Be Able to Provide Help to Those Yemeni People in Need, When You Have Bombed all the Airports in the Country?
You have bombed all the important bridges, roads and airports in Yemen. Are you thinking about the consequences of your moves or you don't care at all? How would you or other humanitarian organizations be able to deliver food, water and medicine to those Yemeni people in need in the next coming days, weeks, months and years? By horse or camel?
Note: The situation in Yemen would become worse than current Syria based on many reasons. As an example, Syria has ground borders with different countries such as Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel. The international community has been able to deliver some help to the Syrian people in different ways through these borderlines or open a safe humanitarian corridor, to some extent, for the Syrian refugees. But Yemen does not have such a possibility in that scale. Thus, it would be wise to stop the madness and prevent a disastrous humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen; before it's too late.
M. Sirani 05.05.2015
The Current U.S. Administration is Partly Suffering from 'Cassandra Syndrome'; President Obama is Uselessly Changing the Staff.
No wonder about the U.S. chaotic foreign policy.
Note: When you don't know exactly what type of disease you have, you probably use a wrong treatment.
M. Sirani 05.05.2015
Note: When you don't know exactly what type of disease you have, you probably use a wrong treatment.
M. Sirani 05.05.2015
Monday, May 4, 2015
Germany's Defense Chief Says: Our Goal in An EU Army. In Case of Such An Event, the U.S.- Led NATO Would Become An Orphan Kid in The International Arena.
Briefly: Should this happen:
This would be a huge step for EU toward more autonomy, independence and maturity in different terms. Such a move can profoundly shape the foreign policy of the EU in both negative and positive manners; depends on the type of EU policy makers and their assumption about the international politics and foreign affairs. Among the EU members, however, the two countries of Germany and France would benefit more than other Union members by this move. To put it simply, this move would inevitably elevate the important role of the EU in general, and France and Germany in particular, in the international arena.
Such a move, in addition, would make the U.S. - led NATO an orphan kid in the international arena; as such, this proposal would highly likely face a serious unpleasant reaction mostly from U.S., UK and some weak states (probably the former Soviet Union's orbit states) within the EU. It should be added that a type of dualism in this matter, i.e. being member of both NATO and the EU Army simultaneously, not only would not be beneficial for the EU, but also it would undoubtedly cause a serious headache in different terms for the Union.
Note: The EU should have performed such a move in the beginning of its establishment in 1993, for example,; when the Soviet Eastern Block was dismantled three years earlier in 1990. It's time for the EU to largely cut the loose from its big brother.
M. Sirani 04.05.2015
This would be a huge step for EU toward more autonomy, independence and maturity in different terms. Such a move can profoundly shape the foreign policy of the EU in both negative and positive manners; depends on the type of EU policy makers and their assumption about the international politics and foreign affairs. Among the EU members, however, the two countries of Germany and France would benefit more than other Union members by this move. To put it simply, this move would inevitably elevate the important role of the EU in general, and France and Germany in particular, in the international arena.
Such a move, in addition, would make the U.S. - led NATO an orphan kid in the international arena; as such, this proposal would highly likely face a serious unpleasant reaction mostly from U.S., UK and some weak states (probably the former Soviet Union's orbit states) within the EU. It should be added that a type of dualism in this matter, i.e. being member of both NATO and the EU Army simultaneously, not only would not be beneficial for the EU, but also it would undoubtedly cause a serious headache in different terms for the Union.
Note: The EU should have performed such a move in the beginning of its establishment in 1993, for example,; when the Soviet Eastern Block was dismantled three years earlier in 1990. It's time for the EU to largely cut the loose from its big brother.
M. Sirani 04.05.2015
Sunday, May 3, 2015
As it Appears: Saudi-Led Coalition Has Deployed some Ground Force in Yemen's Strategic Port of Aden.
Briefly:
No matter how many ground forces have been deployed or will be deployed to Yemen in the next coming days, weeks or months, the current military operation would not lead the Saudi-led coalition to a total victory in Yemen based on many reasons. These reasons have been briefly discussed in some of my previous short notes. In short, the Saudi-led coalition might achieve some success in the short term, but the coalition would lose the battle in Yemen in the long term. As i have repeatedly mentioned the Yemeni war would become the Vietnam war of Saudis.
Note: You are too late, too short, too ineffective with regards to current tension in Yemen. You need a comprehensive and long term plan not only for Yemen but also for the whole Middle East and North Africa with regards to expansionist behavior of the Islamic Regime. You should bear in mind that the military operation alone would not lead you toward victory.
M. Sirani 03.05.2015
No matter how many ground forces have been deployed or will be deployed to Yemen in the next coming days, weeks or months, the current military operation would not lead the Saudi-led coalition to a total victory in Yemen based on many reasons. These reasons have been briefly discussed in some of my previous short notes. In short, the Saudi-led coalition might achieve some success in the short term, but the coalition would lose the battle in Yemen in the long term. As i have repeatedly mentioned the Yemeni war would become the Vietnam war of Saudis.
Note: You are too late, too short, too ineffective with regards to current tension in Yemen. You need a comprehensive and long term plan not only for Yemen but also for the whole Middle East and North Africa with regards to expansionist behavior of the Islamic Regime. You should bear in mind that the military operation alone would not lead you toward victory.
M. Sirani 03.05.2015
Saturday, May 2, 2015
By Keeping the Oil Price Low, Saudi Arabia Has Been Targeting Not Only Iran and Russia, But Also USA and Some Giant Western Oil Companies.
Briefly:
In the beginning of this process, some western pundits enthusiastically & happily welcomed Saudi's act in this matter by claiming that by keeping the oil price at low level, Saudi Arabia has decided to crush the political system in Iran and Russia due to the various conflicts in the Middle East including the Syrian civil war. This move, as the western pundits claimed, would also put an extra pressure on some adversary American Latin countries such as Venezuela and Brasil. What the western pundits did not deeply pay attention to it, at least in the media outlets, was the negative long term impact of this move on the giant western oil companies and most importantly on the price of oil shale and the U.S. as a country that has the largest deposits of oil shale in the world (Green River Formation).
Due to the chaotic foreign policy, double standard and weak responses of Obama administration and some EU countries with regards to various conflicts in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and some of its close allies in the region, have been trying to use one of their powerful leverage, i.e. oil, in order to put an extra pressure not only on Russia and Iran but also on the USA and some EU countries. This process would highly likely continue in the future as well up until the moment that it causes massive unemployment in the oil & gas sectors of the western countries; it continues up until the moment that extracting and retorting the oil shale would become a very expensive and consequently an impossible process for the U.S. and American oil companies.
Note: Saudi Arabia would continue with this policy as much as it can; unless the country would observe a fundamental shift in the foreign policy of the USA and some EU countries with regards to different conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa. Should this happen, Saudi Arabia and its close allies would stable the price of crude oil in the international market much better than current situation.
In the long term, the western countries would lose much more than Russia and Iran in this oil proxy war due to many factors, for example, the higher price of labor, the existence of powerful labor union, various civil society movements, and NGOs, etc in the West. Although the political systems in both Russia and Iran are mainly depending on oil revenue, but massive unemployment in one or some oil & gas sectors would not cause a serious problem in these countries due to the severe lack of democratic institutions, powerful labor unions, NGOs and civil society movements. On the contrary, such an event, would cause a serious problem in the USA, UK, France, Norway and some other western democratic countries. This problem, however, is easily solvable by changing some policy with regards to various conflicts in Ukraine and other parts of the Middle East.
M. Sirani 02.05.2015
In the beginning of this process, some western pundits enthusiastically & happily welcomed Saudi's act in this matter by claiming that by keeping the oil price at low level, Saudi Arabia has decided to crush the political system in Iran and Russia due to the various conflicts in the Middle East including the Syrian civil war. This move, as the western pundits claimed, would also put an extra pressure on some adversary American Latin countries such as Venezuela and Brasil. What the western pundits did not deeply pay attention to it, at least in the media outlets, was the negative long term impact of this move on the giant western oil companies and most importantly on the price of oil shale and the U.S. as a country that has the largest deposits of oil shale in the world (Green River Formation).
Due to the chaotic foreign policy, double standard and weak responses of Obama administration and some EU countries with regards to various conflicts in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and some of its close allies in the region, have been trying to use one of their powerful leverage, i.e. oil, in order to put an extra pressure not only on Russia and Iran but also on the USA and some EU countries. This process would highly likely continue in the future as well up until the moment that it causes massive unemployment in the oil & gas sectors of the western countries; it continues up until the moment that extracting and retorting the oil shale would become a very expensive and consequently an impossible process for the U.S. and American oil companies.
Note: Saudi Arabia would continue with this policy as much as it can; unless the country would observe a fundamental shift in the foreign policy of the USA and some EU countries with regards to different conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa. Should this happen, Saudi Arabia and its close allies would stable the price of crude oil in the international market much better than current situation.
In the long term, the western countries would lose much more than Russia and Iran in this oil proxy war due to many factors, for example, the higher price of labor, the existence of powerful labor union, various civil society movements, and NGOs, etc in the West. Although the political systems in both Russia and Iran are mainly depending on oil revenue, but massive unemployment in one or some oil & gas sectors would not cause a serious problem in these countries due to the severe lack of democratic institutions, powerful labor unions, NGOs and civil society movements. On the contrary, such an event, would cause a serious problem in the USA, UK, France, Norway and some other western democratic countries. This problem, however, is easily solvable by changing some policy with regards to various conflicts in Ukraine and other parts of the Middle East.
M. Sirani 02.05.2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)