Israel vs. Iran

There are marked similarities between the two countries--Israel and Iran--as each strives for their own independent existence.  For one thing, both are Middle-Eastern in orientation.  For another, each lives in isolation in its neighborhood.

Israel's Isolation

 I think it is right to say that, though the Jews who migrated to Israel were predominantly European, the country has still retained its historical, Middle-East roots; and because of this, Israelis should no longer be deemed Western culturally, anymore than the Afghans should be lumped in with the English to form a contrived, make-shift tradition.  No, Israelis are vying with other peoples of the region for water rights, arable land and mega-city sites.  Of course, they want West Bank settlements for their people, a growing population.  Of course, they want Jerusalem as their nation's capital, because it is a thriving metropolis.  Their interests and concerns are, since 1948, existentially and myopically zeroed-in to Middle-East locations.  Nor have they shown interest that their country become an international power.  It is not like Brazil, whose aspirations for power and prestige pervade the entire South American continent.  The Israelis have made it clear; Israelis are self-absorbed with the land of Israel:  they are developing a territory for their people--and; the world can go to hell!  Moreover, it has made clear it does not take UN condemnation resolutions against Israeli actions seriously; nor has it shown any intention to join with other nations on matters of international concern, such as in signing the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons treaty, that several Middle-East nations have become a party to, including Iran in 1979.

Look, after the slaughter of 6 million Jews in Europe, their brothers and sisters, Jews are necessarily out for themselves!  They have seen how others regard them.  The Jews in Berlin prior to Hitler ingratiated themselves into the German Government; they wanted to be Germans first; Jews second.  Look what it got them--a residence in some Nazi-run pogrom and ultimately, a place-name on one of the innumerable lists of Holocaust Victims.

This self-centered stance of the Israelis has caused isolation from their neighbors.  Jordan is friendly, but that country is composed of Palestinians ousted from land now part of Israel.  Who did the ousting is of no concern today; the point is, Jordan is not only Middle-Eastern but Islamic and Palestinian in sympathy.

Syria years ago attempted to develop nuclear capability and Israel bombed its nuclear site in 2007s.  In fact, ever since 1967, when the neighboring Arab states lined up to throw Israelis into the Mediterranean sea--like any bullying nations gang up against some nation they perceive weak and undesirable--Israel has found good reason to live in isolation.  Currently, it is trying to court weak African nations, e.g., Kenya and S. Sudan, who appear as beleaguered among stronghold leaders on the African Continent as Israel does amid the power forces in the Middle-East.  It simply has no regionally friendly nations to cavort with.  Turkey's out, since the 2010 fiasco in which Israel stopped humanitarian aid to flow to the Palestinians via Turkey ships. Eygpt is not against Israel, but nonetheless, Egyptians must look with horror at the treatment Palestinians are getting, because the Arab world as a block and Israel see little value in dealing with them.  So, as things stand now, the Palestinians are low-men-on-the-Arab-totem-pole; and Israel's existence serves as an obnoxious reminder that the Arab states have not coalesced into a major political entity, and thus are not much better off than the Jewish state in the control over regional affairs, some affecting them.
      
Be it remembered, that the Zionists established Israel by double-crossing Great Britain, which had been given responsibility for the Sinai Peninsula by the major world powers.  So from the start of their nation, the Israeli Jews have been turning off countries, who could help them, but who won't ever again.

The sad commentary on this lonely state among the Islamic countries surrounding it is the region could really benefit from Muslims intermingling with Jews!  Israel could provide technical assistance in bringing the Sinai region into the 21st Century.  Israel's prowess and expertese has been clearly demonstrated in all the wars it has waged with its neighbors; but what if they were not simply to dominate the region technologically and culturally but were to extend its influence--pouring goodwill beyond its borders to those it has defeated in battle many times since its inception?  I think it shameful that after England had won the Falkand War, it let Argentina lie in rubble, rather than attempt to build friendship among those it had defeated, as the US did in Germany and Japan after World War II.  Making allies out of combatant enemies is what the United States has accomplished--to its credit--revealing its exceptional character. 

Remember too, that the United States, not China, initated trade agreements between the two countries, when China was existing as an international pariah.  The Republicans at the time, I think, were really mad at President Nixon that he should seek out meetings in Beijing!  And maybe, there would be no Republican support for him to remain in office after what Republicans believed was wrong for him to do in reaching out to China.

Finally, may I add a further comment that I believe, though can't prove, that the reason why Jews have been so badly isolated by neighboring Arabs is not so much because of Jewish insistence to make for themselves a comfortable home in the Middle-East (despite Islamic protestations and hostile actions); but I think the overarching reason is because it's the US Jews who made the Zionist cause succeed.  Note that US support is not all that great, even if the US has provided Israel with nuclear capabilities, including the nuclear bomb.  Have you seen American troops occupying Israeli soil or American military joining forces with the Israeli military in joint ventures?  Has Israel become an Iraq or even a Philippines?  Visible daily presence of American forces--like those present in Germany today--is what I consider championing a nation's existence that houses them.  Rather, it appears to be that the US has simply given Israel's military toys to play with!

Iran's Isolation and its current attempts to break out

That the United States support for Israel is the real reason for the Islamic world's hatred of Israel may be open to debate, but there can be no debate that the United States' history of interference in the affairs of Iran has brought about Iran's present isolation.  Indeed, many Congressmen and other politicians are right now calling for  United States military action to overthrow the Iranian government and make another Iraq (but deleting aims involving becoming a nuclear power)!  More nation-building in the offing?

Surrounding Iran are Afghanistan and Iraq--both invaded by United States troops, presumably to rid the area of Al Quaeda.  Is Iran to be the next to experience US military occupation?  Iranians might well think so.

Since the 1950s, the US has sent a clear message to Iran: the US will have a say in the Iranian affairs, even should that government be democratically elected.  Why?  Because Iran is an oil exporter.  When Iran nationalized that industry, it effectively said goodby to the US and Britain big oil corporations, e.g., Gulf Oil, Socony-Mobil, Standard Oil of New Jersey, and Standard Oil of California.  Iran was convinced at the time that those corporations were keeping up to 40% of profits for themselves from the newly state-created National Iranian Oil Company.  It now sells oil to China, who already counts on 15% of its oil from Iranian wells.  Moreover, China is benefitting from its entry into the Middle-East through Pakistan and Iran by inserting its own sphere of influence.

Russia continues to supply Iran with arms and in other ways, too, shows its support.  So, though isolated by the contiguity of US-sponsored nation-states, Iran is aligning itself with powerful brokers that will enable it to remain existing independent despite attempts to topple its government, e.g., through sanctions.  Some Arab states are concerned over Iran's current aggressive behavior in supporting Hezbollah and Syra.

Nevertheless, because the Arab world is so fractured, US corporations have held sway in controlling oil traffic through the US military predominant presence, particularly, that of the US navy. 

Iran's Boldest Venture to Break Out of Multilateralism Isolation: Iraq

Al-Sadr, Iraqi Islamic leader, has recently returned from Iran.  He sides with the Shiites, though is known to treat Sunnis fairly.  Even as Al-Maliki turns up the heat for a Shiite-controlled national government without due representation of Shiites and Kurds, Al-Sadr in an Iraqi leadership role, to my mind, carries the interests of Iran onto Iraq's soil.

It has been said for years that certain members of the Iraqi government were beneficiaries of Iranian money in lieu of their promulgating policies favorable to Iran, but now with Al-Sadr back, I believe the Iranian dominance of the Shiite government will become even more pronounced and its support of local, terrorist Shiite-favored groups will become more visible.

We come now to the present state of affairs between Israel and Iran.

"Israel vs. Iran"

In occasional times of conflict between Islamic nations and Israel, Iran has sent its missiles onto Israeli soil--with little effect or harm.  Iran for over 18 years has been attempting to develop nuclear capability, but the IAEA has just reported that Iran now has the technical know-how to make a nuclear bomb--after 18 years!

Be it noted that Iran is noted for its lack of hostile aggression over centuries of being tested and monitored! 

The charge currently leveled against Iran's entry into the nuclear arena is that it would lead to proliferation of nuclear weaponry across the Arab world--with Saudis next in line to develop.  I think it is necessary to admit who is really behind prohibiting Iran to develop nuclear capability that should enhance its prospects of self-automy: it's the big oil corporations with their sweet deals with oil-producing barons--the same oil corporations who are seeking, ever since the close of the Iraqi Awe-and-Shudder (I mean, Shock and Awe) War, to benefit from making deals with Iraq to control its oil production and distribution, along with the deals the Helliburton Corporation has been able to make there.

The United States is caught in a bind.  It either makes good its threat to do all possible to prevent Iran from making nuclear weapons or it must be willing to give up on its American construct, its new Iraq.  To be sure, should Romeny become President, the path becomes clear:  He would promote American Big Business interests in the region (which sees more oil to profit from), and take on Iran, perhaps by bombing, perhaps by invading.  He would curtail entitlements programs that aren't specified in the Constitution and carry on military campaigns for the sake of "security and protection," which are sanctioned in the Constitution.  Be it observed that over the past 50 years, Big oil has manipulated the region's politics with the help of US military might and without much objection from home.  American foreign policy in the Middle-East still is dictated by the oil giants.

No wonder the Arab world, including the Saudis, hate the US so!  The US government has promoted the interests of Big Business at the expense of the citizenry in oil rich Arab countries!

Advocates of being tough with Iran frequently use the proliferation argument. If Iran were to develop nuclear capability, then other nations, such as Saudi Arabia, would follow its lead.  This argument is the old domino theory applied to the Middle-East:  If Vietnam were to fall to communism, the entire Asian continent would become communist, perhaps even the Philippines and Australia, too.  There's nothing I know of that suggests every country--Egypt?--is anxious to become a nuclear power.  Indeed, some have renounced such ambitions, already.

My personal take                      

I think the United States and other countries of the world can live with another nuclear power in the region.  True, it might end Israel's monopoly, assuming that indeed France gave Israel the bomb in the 1960s, as is stated by some.  Then too, nobody's shutting down North Korea, nor is intending to invade it.  Of course, North Korea is not oil-producing and not of interest to major US corporations.

You know, it is said that lobbyists write regulatory legislation in their particular fields of interest for their governments, that really regulation of industries is a joke.  After the 2008 melt-down of banks and investment companies, which seemingly were subject to close regulation, one gives pause to wonder whether there's truth in the thought that just about any government is in the hands of the corporations who can afford to control it, e.g., by buying politicians and by curtailing the funding of regulatory governmental agencies.  Maybe, the US is not really the democracy it looks like and avows to be.