‘US/Israel seek Lebanese civil war to derail a Hezbollah in its prime’: Qandil

Original link: http://middleeastobserver.net/us-israel-seek-lebanese-civil-war-to-derail-a-hezbollah-in-its-prime-qandil/

Description:

In light of the recent massacre of seven protesters and the wounding of dozens of others in a highly sensitive district of Beirut, senior political analyst Nasser Qandil argues that the US and Israel are seeking to drag Hezbollah into a new Lebanese civil war that would rob the movement from engaging in a decisive war with Israel while in its military prime.

Days ago, on the 14th of October, at least seven people were killed and 60 others injured after unknown gunmen attacked Hezbollah and Amal supporters as they passed through Beirut’s sensitive Tayyouneh district as part of an organised peaceful protest.

In a joint statement, Hezbollah and Amal said armed groups belonging to Samir Geagea’s Christian Lebanese Forces (LF) Party fired at the protesters from rooftops, aiming at their heads, in an attempt to drag Lebanon into a sectarian civil war.

The Tayyouneh district is historically an area of political and sectarian sensitivity, as a key site in the outbreak and development of Lebanon’s Civil War (1975-1990).

Source: NBN via Kalam Siyasi (YouTube)

Date: October 17, 2021

(Please help MEO keep producing independent translations for you by contributing a sustainable monthly amount https://www.patreon.com/MiddleEastObserver?fan_landing=true)

Transcript:

Nasser Qandil, Senior Lebanese Political Analyst:

I hear those that (say) ‘they believe Lebanon is a priority (for the US to target)’. Indeed (it is), from the very first day that a resistance (movement in Lebanon) was born, (a resistance) that defeated and humiliated Israel, Lebanon became an American priority, because Israel was – and will always remain – an American priority. (It is only if) the resistance (in Lebanon) is defeated, only then will Lebanon no longer be an American priority.

Back in 2007, I saw an image of (former PM) President Fouad Saniora with (former) President George W. Bush on the White House lawn, and the news said that the Prime Minister of Japan was (meanwhile) waiting in the hotel; Lebanon is not more important than Japan (for the US), and (former) President Fouad Saniora is not more important than the Prime Minister of Japan either, but the resistance (in Lebanon) is indeed more important than the US interests in Japan, because it threatens Israel’s security and poses an existential threat to Israel’s future. (Therefore,) as long as this reality (i.e. resistance being an existential threat to Israel) increases and grows, and the American concern about it grows (in light of the) idea of (a US) withdrawal from the (Middle East) region, (the US worries) how (it) will leave Israel (behind with the threat of) this reality. Consequently, (US) activity for creating security belts for Israel is accelerating.

(Yet) from whom (does the US want to protect Israel)? Iran will not start a war (against Israel) – let’s say things as they are – Syria will not start a war (on the level of) states. The spearhead that can turn any confrontation in (this) region (between it and) Israel into a war –

Host:

– (is) the resistance in Lebanon (Hezbollah) –

Qandil:

– is the resistance in Lebanon, which the Israelis say (about it) – and that’s not me saying it – the Israelis say, and the Americans (themselves) say that the surplus power that Hezbollah now has at the level of the expertise of its fighters (gained) from the Syrian war, (these fighters) who are more than 50,000 and that possess contemporary (and advanced) combat experience, and (at the level of) the kinds of weapons that it has, (this powerful position of Hezbollah) may not be seen again. (They believe that) five years later, Hezbollah may not have this readiness (for war) which they have today –

Host:

– Why (is that)?

Qandil:

Because five years later, the resistance (in Lebanon) might not possess weapons more advanced than the precision-guided missiles (it currently has), while the Americans and Israelis might possess a more developed (weapon by then), at least this (current favourable position for Hezbollah) is not guaranteed (in the future), (while) now it is guaranteed that (Hezbollah) is the superior (force today), and (their weapons) are the more powerful/effective weapons. (Hezbollah’s) elite fighters that have just came out of a war still have the same vitality, readiness, and (required) experience to enter a new war. Five years later (however, according to US calculations), this (elite force) would be out of the battlefield, and a new generation that does not have the experience of the (previous elite) would be on (front lines instead) –

Host:

– For this reason, they are working on suppressing this (generation of elites) and producing a new generation; the fifth-generation (perhaps)?

Qandil:

No, they consider – the Israelis consider – that Hezbollah is ready for a war (against them) now, for that, we must pass up (Hezbollah’s) opportunity of dragging us into a war which they have the legitimacy (to start). They believe that Hezbollah is on full readiness (to start) a war. I’m not adopting (these views), I’m describing the American-Israeli view; they say that the issue of (intercepting) the fuel ships (coming from Iran to Lebanon) gives Hezbollah the legitimacy to start a war if we intercept them –

Host:

– (This would) justify (starting a war against Israel).

Qandil:

– (Hezbollah) would obtain the legitimacy (to start a war) but they –

Host:

– The (Israelis) don’t want to go to a war against (Hezbollah) because (Hezbollah) enjoys full readiness –

Qandil:

– Yes, (that’s the point), in their opinion (Hezbollah) is now (fully ready for a war) –

Host:

– five years later, will (Hezbollah) no longer be ready for a war (against Israel)?

Qandil:

That’s (the US and Israel’s) reading of the matter, that they must avoid (going to a war against Hezbollah) during the (next) five years –

Host:

– So, for the next five years, the (preferred US-Israeli war is the war –

Qandil:

– a Lebanese civil war –

Host:

– that (seems to be) brewing today. They would distract (Hezbollah) with internal (affairs and issues) –

Qandil:

– Exactly!

Host:

– They’re betting (their hopes on Hezbollah’s loss of) this readiness five years later –

Qandil:

– Exactly! (Hezbollah, according to their perception,) will be drained and have lost the moral high ground (that it enjoys today), and that’s a very significant matter; Hezbollah (is) a pure force (i.e. committed to morals/ethics etc) no matter how hard they try to slander it –

Host:

– The balance of power will change too.

Qandil:

– (but) when (Hezbollah) takes part in the civil war ‘game’, it’ll no longer be the same (party) it was, it will turn into a local militia (fighting) with (other) local militias. Even the majesty of (Hezbollah’s) power will erode by (its very participation in) the civil war, as it is different from wars that we’re familiar with, (such as) wars against Israel and other (enemies threatening Lebanon). Consequently, (dragging Hezbollah into a civil war) is necessary for the erosion of its moral and material strength. Therefore, the American-Israeli decision, after their failure in turning the October 17 (2019 protests) into a revolution against Hezbollah (under the false pretext that it is the party) responsible for the (Lebanese) economic crisis and the prohibition of cash flow into Lebanon – after this failure – the alternative (plan) is (exploiting) the (Beirut) Port (explosion) investigation case and triggering the Christian street with militia formations to lure Hezbollah into a civil war –

Host:

– And (Hezbollah) will not be tempted (by this incitement).

Qandil:

Until now…

Host:

Those are dangerous words! What (do you mean by) ‘until now’?

Qandil:

Let me explain to you –

Host:

Why (would they be lured into a civil war)?

Qandil:

(In) my opinion, there is always a limit to which leaderships can control the (rage) of the public, and those who know the history of wars would understand this idea; we are currently before – there are opinions that have begun to emerge among the Shias –

Host:

– ‘Why didn’t we continue (the fight in Tayyouneh), we would’ve beat them up…’

Qandil:

(Yes, and talk such as) ‘we always adopt stances of chivalry, we get slaughtered and killed, and you (leaderships) tell us (to be) patient and endure (the harm that is targeting us); they did (the same) to us in Khaldeh, and Badaro as well, and tomorrow they’ll (attack us for the) third and fourth time’ –

Host:

– And (they attacked Shias) in…I forgot what’s the name of the town, near the Lebanese borders…

Qandil:

Yes, in southern (Lebanon), in Chouaya.

Host:

Yes, (I meant) Chouaya.

Qandil:

If we reach a moment where – God forbid – the focal point that is supposed to deal with (a certain attack) is one of the (Shia) tribes (in Lebanon), and the Amal and Hezbollah leaderships fail to control them, and (if the events take place) in an area in which control is not organized (by certain political leaderships); an area in which, if a tribe was attacked, and the people respond (to the attack) – I’m giving scenarios (as an example) –

Host:

– So, the scheme to create a civil will remain (a major threat today) –

Qandil:

In 1975, Imam Musa al-Sadr (may God reveal his whereabouts), why did he go to the town of al-Qaa? Because the problem was made up there (in al-Qaa) such that the people of the (Shia) tribes would attack al-Qaa; a problem was made up (to drag Shia) tribes ( in a war against Christians), so (Imam al-Sadr) had to go and sit in the church and say ‘I would defend this church with my ‘amāmah (turban) and jubbah (gown)’, because he felt that the target (of the made up events) was to trigger a response (from Shia tribes in that region).

Okay, so Mr (Nabih) Berri would do it once (i.e. call people to control their rage and follow the orders of the leadership), his eminence Sayyed (Hassan Nasrallah) would do it too, (but) if the scheme (of dragging Lebanese people into a civil war) is ongoing, if there’s no general national climate that would react to this threat (with wisdom) and (take the necessary) steps at that level, if (we keep acting upon) the prevailing mentality in security, judiciary, and political (affairs in Lebanon) that is the mentality of ‘Abu Melhem’ (i.e. a TV character that’s referred to in Lebanese culture to denote a person who proposes reconciliation and peaceful solutions in all dispute) to (resolve issues) with courtesy, using (words like) ‘disputes’ (to describe severe problems), and (calling for) controlling a situation (whenever an issue arises) –

Host:

– (falling into a civil war) would be inevitable (in that case)? –

Qandil:

(We) will then be in (grave) danger (of falling into a civil war) – in my opinion – we will be in (grave) danger.

Anonymous on October 25, 2021 · at 2:58 am EST/EDT

Here is a short history and analysis of the Iranian economy over the last 40 years, specifically under the Hashemi and Khatami administrations, so you can understand what is going on in Iran a bit better, Yk. And Lebanon is currently set to begin negotiations with the IMF, so the lessons here pertain to Lebanon as well.

The root of many of Iran’s economic problems today go back to the 26-article agreement between Iran and the IMF during the Hashemi and Khatami administration, which was the basis for the economic structural adjustment policies began by Hashemi and continued by Khatami.

During the Hashemi administration, views and suggestions offered by the IMF were taken into consideration, but no formal document making commitments to the IMF was drafted. One night in late April 1999, after a government meeting, the economic minister of the Khatami reformist government of the time, Dr. Hosein Namazi, was handed a folder from the Central Bank on the steps on the way out of the meeting and told to “sign this”. He replied: “I must study it first.” Inside the folder was a letter addressed to Mr. Camdessus the Managing Director of the IMF. The text of the agreement contained 26 articles with explanations in 19 pages with Farsi translations which had to be signed by the Central Bank director, the Vice President, the head of the Planning and Budget Organization, and the Economic Minister, and also, the name of Mr. Camdessus was written as a signatory. (The letter was dated April 29, 1999)

The creation of a market-based order of pricing and foreign exchange, pricing reforms and the increase of petroleum product prices on the domestic market, the need to eliminate all implicit subsidies and price regulations, the abolition of governmental price control (interest rates) and service fees in favor of determination by banks, permission for non-banking private financial institutions, allowing banks more freedom and the utilization of specialist advisors from the World Bank and IMF, the determination of foreign exchange prices through the market mechanism, and the abolition of restrictions on imports were some of the most important clauses of this agreement.

In practice, this agreement basically went into action in 1989 with the start of the Hashemi administration in Tehran, in line with policies of de-escalation as the “Structural Adjustment Policies”. At that time, Hashemi was keen to find someone for the Economic Minister role who would not only work towards implementing the IMF strategy, but would also believe in the strategy in their own heart. And so, Mr. Nurbakhsh was chosen for the position, and right off the bat he started on negotiations and agreements with the World Bank and the IMF, and slowly these policies were put in action, and as a result prices began to go up, and the increase in price of foreign exchange (eg. dollar) accelerated, and the ground was prepared for the Iranian people’s dissatisfaction.

In 1993, at the start of Mr. Hashemi’s second term, the Parliament did not give their vote of confidence to Mr. Nurbakhsh, and Hashemi appointed him as Vice President for Economic Affairs. In Mr. Hashemi’s second term, these policies continued, and in 1995 the inflation rate in Iran hit 50% and the dollar reached 800 Tomans (8000 Rials). And in the reformist government which commenced in 1997, Mr. Khatami officially announced that “my economic policy is the same as Mr. Hashemi’s economic policy.” And Mr. Nurbakhsh whose 4-year term as the Central Bank director had still not ended, continued in this role.

In the end, because of Mr. Namazi’s written letter to the President and further discussions with him resulted in the agreement with the IMF never getting signed. But even though the document was not signed, and Iran did not agree to make any commitments to the IMF, but the provisions in the agreement were implemented into Iranian law by the government. The proponents of the agreement, who had lost hope in the thing getting signed, announced to the IMF that the provisions of the agreement had been legislated and passed into Iranian law, and their adoption was mandatory by the government.

But let us go back to the beginning years of the Islamic Republic, where the President of the time, Mr. Banisadr, had stated that “there is not a single penny in the Treasury, and the Islamic Republic is finished.” So, how did the Iranians manage an 8-year war with an empty Treasury?

Banisadr’s full statement followed with: “Finished is a gross understatement, it has already collapsed, and its last rite has also been recited. I am referring to the regime, which will also collapse soon and be done for good.”

Regarding the Treasury, we know that based on predictions of income and expenses in the yearly budget, every day the Treasury has incomings and outgoings. If there is a delay in receiving some of the incomes, it is possible that some expenses will also be delayed based on priorities or arrangements will be made to make up for the decrease in income, so to say that the Treasury is empty and so the government or the country will collapse is incorrect, and as we have seen, nothing of the sort happened. As the Treasurer of the time stated, the light in the Treasury is always on. But there were indeed some difficulties. And of course the economic conditions of the country were in a special situation under the influence of the war. According to reports by the Trade Minister of the time, the entire grain stocks of the whole country amounted to a mere 3 day supply. Imagine if flour did not reach the bakeries, what kinds of things could have happened, but all the problems were overcome with the efforts and truly significant sacrifices of the people and the government.

So, how is it that back then during the war, the government was able to manage the affairs of the country, but today when conditions are relatively so much better, the situation is so dire and popular dissatisfaction is so widespread?

One of the reasons that during the war Iran did not lose an inch of soil to Iraq, and eventually Iraq was even condemned to pay reparations as the aggressor who started the war, was the Iranian people’s endless support on and off the field of battle. The people believed in the government and the system and did what they could to help out.

An important and noteworthy point is that the absolute majority of government officials were financially in the same boat as the average people, and they understood the people’s problems and also the people saw them as part of themselves.

Another important reason was that the government was very sensitive about the people’s livelihoods, the price of commodities and foreign exchange, so much so that if the price of an item went up or if a shortage was felt, the matter would be addressed at the very beginning of the sessions of government meetings which were held twice a week every week at the time, and before anything else was discussed at the meetings. Contrast this with today, when prices and the market are left completely to themselves, with literally no oversight and no control or regulation, because as we know, based on the agreement with the IMF, the government has accepted the abolition of price controls and the determination of the prices of the majority of commodities has been left to the mechanism of the market, and this is one of the important reasons for the current situation and the discontent of the public.

Another important thing that was done during the war, which even wealthy countries are forced to do during times of war, was the rationing of basic necessities through coupons. The people were not just assured that they would receive these items, but they had no worries about price stability, in contrast to today where many people cannot afford meat and rice, and the ability to purchase milk and dairy and eggs and others foods is also gradually becoming more difficult.

One more important action which was taken to assist low-income strata was the establishment of a retirement and disability insurance for all rural people working in the production sector who had reached 60 years of age, which also helped keep rural people in rural areas and even encouraged them to return from the cities.

Another important difference between then and now is the matter of financial corruption. In the wartime conditions there was never any of the various forms of corruption such as embezzlement, abuse of funds, land grabbing, mountain grabbing, forest grabbing in any significant degree and as extensive and widespread and with such astronomical sums as today.

And still another important difference pertains to the views and beliefs about living simply and modestly and shying away from luxury, which at that time was very effective in preventing national resource from being wasted.

Did Iran have much exports at that time? How did the government supply the country’s expenses?

Due to the wartime conditions, exports were limited. Non-state exports mostly comprised rugs, pistachio, caviar, etc, where the resulting foreign currency did not belong to the government and belonged to the exporter, and would be sold to the Central Bank, which the Central Bank would in turn offer as foreign exchange for obtaining services. The state’s Rial income from non-oil exports was negligible, and many incentives were set up to encourage and promote exports. The most important export item was oil which comprised the major items in the government’s Rial and foreign currency budget. The exports of other items such as copper and other minerals were negligible. After oil, tax income made up the largest portion of the government’s budget and the state’s expenses. The ratio of tax to oil income was variable, particularly because tankers, storage facilities, refineries and installations were constantly coming under attack and struck by missiles.

Were the needs of the country obtained through domestic production or imports?

Every country obtains some of its needs through domestic production and some through imports. In regards to domestic production, on top of limitations which existed in regards to obtaining basic material from abroad and the wartime conditions where production facilities were threatened, Iran was also in the primary stages of industrialization and development, and many of the items which are produced domestically today, perforce had to be imported at that time, but the import of luxury items like certain automobiles and household appliances was not permitted and the people were not keen on such items either. Some items which were dual-purpose, so to speak, and could be used in war, such as even barbed wire, would not be sold to Iran by anyone, and these limitations were a powerful incentive for attention to domestic production.

In the 1980s an economic duality of government and free market arose in Iran

A few points first,

1. Centralized planning by the state and state ownership and the rejection of private ownership over the apparatus of production and public services which are the basic tenets of all socialist systems have been a failure in practice. Although, socialist states had thought up some arrangements to counter the results and consequences of such a system, such as lack of motivation by the workforce, low productivity and increasing cost of production and decreasing gross domestic production, such as limited exceptions to private sector activity, but this same centralized planning in the hands of the state together with state ownership, according to those involved in these systems, was the most important factor in the decline and fall of socialist systems in these countries.

2. On the other hand in countries under a liberal capitalist system, the mechanism of the free market was considered sufficient on its own to create an economic balance, and the government was not permitted to implement economic policy. And the distribution of income was also left to the mechanism of the market, and the government had no responsibility towards that either; there were consequences, such as extraordinary poverty and adversity for the working classes, and an unimaginable drop in life expectancy of working class families. Based on the conditions of supply and demand in the market, workers had no choice but to work every day of the week. According to official reports in 1840 in France, the average work day, even for women and children, was 17 hours per day, and in England it was 16 hours, and wages were minimal; ie. this wage was just enough to keep a worker alive so that they could keep working (based on personal freedom in making contracts with the government having no right to interfere and no laws to determine the terms of the contract). The result of such conditions was extensive worker dissatisfaction and protests which eventually brought down the liberal capitalist system, which gave way to a system of regulated capitalism (mid 19th century). The government took on duties pertaining to the regulation of the economy, confronting recession, crises and unemployment, through implementing financial and monetary policy and laws regarding minimum wage, work hours per day, mandatory holidays, and social security.

3. The result that none of these two models have been successful and the world through centuries of experience has reached the conclusion that neither the centralization of economic activity in the hands of the state and the abolition of the private sector, nor the neutrality of the government’s role and total faith in the mechanism of the market is enough to create an economic balance automatically.

4. In wartime conditions, the role and interference of governments in the economy increases, because otherwise, hoarding, panic buying, extreme price hikes, famine, and disorder in economic activity behind the front lines, can determine the fate of the war. And as such, the Iranian government had a responsibility to provide basic necessities, special commodities, overseeing and controlling the market prices, etc, in the wartime conditions, which it did.

What was Iranian currency worth during the war? And when did it being to lose its value?

During the war, the Iranian government was very sensitive to the price of goods, the value of the Rial, and the rate of foreign exchange. As you we’ll know, one of the biggest drivers of inflation is war. In times of war, due to many reasons, such as lack of security, disorder in communication systems, damage to production capabilities, shortage of goods and hoarding, the price of goods and the rate of inflation increase eccentrically. Even so, according to official statistics, in 1985 the inflation rate in Iran during the war was only 4%. 10 years later, which was 7 years after the war, in the government of Mr. Hashemi, the inflation rate reached 50%.

The foreign exchange rates also increased massively, such that the dollar which was 120 Tomans (1200 Rials) in 1989, reached nearly 800 Tomans in 1995. This was the first time when the value of Iranian currency plummeted with such speed, and the results of following the IMF’s guidelines became apparent in this form. It was here that Mr. Hashemi felt the danger, and despite his own prior opinion by using experts and specialists from outside of the Central Bank, fixed the rate of the dollar at 300 Tomans.

This story is to be continued, but as I said at the beginning, Lebanon will be conducting negotiations with the IMF starting in the following days. Nasrallah and Hezbollah are aware of exactly who and what they are dealing with. And the economists of the Resistance today have a keen grasp of their field.

Yesterday, Nasrallah announced his roadmap for negotiations with the IMF in order to prevent the imposition of the West’s conditions on Lebanon, which requires its own write-up and analysis which I will try to get to if amarynth doesn’t beat me to it.

But a short update from the Zionist front. The Israelis have announced that they are allocating a budget of a billion or so dollars towards striking Iranian nuclear facilities. In response, Ali Shamkhani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, tweeted that the Zionists should also allocate tens of thousands of billions of dollars for reconstruction of their country afterwards.

The Israelis have assassinated Iranian nuclear scientists, sabotaged nuclear facilities, and taken various other actions against Iran’s nuclear project, and they have received due responses, and nobody except themselves knows the pains which they have endured; responses which have caused them to send international mediators to beg Iran to stop the process of punishments.

In any case, now they have stated that they are allocating 1.5 billion dollars to strike Iranian nuclear installations. And Iran has responded on the highest level, that if Israel does such a thing, Iran will turn all of the Zionist pseudo-state into ashes and rubble.

Who thinks Israel is bluffing? And who thinks Iran is bluffing? Place your bets, ladies and gents!

And on another note, there has been some developments between Iran and Armenia, and some agreements have been made.

Yahya Saree has announced that Yemeni troops are now on the hills overlooking the city of Marib. He has warned all civilians in the area to move away from military sites.

https://newsmedia.tasnimnews.com/Tasnim/Uploaded/Image/1400/08/02/1400080219191745123893424.jpg — And last but not least, an Israeli ship caught fire off the Canadian coast yesterday.

After hours of silence, Israeli media eventually broke the news of fire aboard the Zim. According to their reports, at least 40 containers have fallen overboard. Fire fighting ships arrived on the scene to combat the blaze.

It goes without saying who the culprit is here. And the message of this attack is also clear: nowhere is safe.

29 Comments

j. casey on October 18, 2021 · at 9:26 am EST/EDT

So, what are the rules of engagement when Hez fighters are killed in sniper attack like this? How does Hez respond?
- Bill on October 18, 2021 · at 10:04 am EST/EDT
  
  If they can determine who ordered the attacks then retaliate against those individuals and afterwords issue a statement. Limit the scope of the attacks. I agree that this looks like a trap that is being set by Israel and the US.
- A.Deplorable on October 18, 2021 · at 11:01 am EST/EDT
  
  How does Hezb respond? Not by starting a civil war, which is what the Anglo Zionazis want. I hope the Lebanese rememember these AZC tactics were used in Serbia, Syria and Ukraine — and in Lebanon itself. Falangist Christians were the tool which Israel used to split Lebanon during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon under Arik Sharon.
  
  The snipers might have been trained in Israel: aiming for the head is an Israeli specialty. I remember some London police went to Israel for special training under Blair, and when they came back home to London the first thing they did was to gang up on an innocent tourist and pump bullets into his head.
  - Tommy Apeiron on October 18, 2021 · at 11:46 am EST/EDT
    
    Israel specializes in false-flag attacks, from the attack on the USS Liberty right up to the present day. “By way of deception thou shalt make war.” – Mossad motto
    - Rhys Jaggar on October 19, 2021 · at 1:29 am EST/EDT
      
      Yes, and that is why Jews can have no complaints when people go to war against them. They are always warmongering and have been since the early 20th century. Once you make war through deception, you no longer have any moral high ground, you are just a scheming malefic.
      
      War from self-defence is honorable. Waging war through scheming needs stamping out.
      - Tommy Apeiron on October 19, 2021 · at 10:40 am EST/EDT
        
        The irony is, Tel Megiddo is right down the road from Trump Heights on the Golan. When Trump finally skates off to Israel to avoid prosecution for his many crimes, he can charge admission to Armageddon. That way his true-believer Christian Zionist followers can have front-row seats to the end of the USA as we know it. Ever the entrepreneur, he can have their Rapture suits all pressed and ready to go.
- pogohere on October 19, 2021 · at 3:44 pm EST/EDT
  
  Hezbollah might work on its allied Christians to take on their traitorous “brethren,” a la
  
  Eastern Christianity Fell into the Last Ambush in East Beirut, But ‘for Every Samir there’s a Habib’
ftmntf on October 18, 2021 · at 10:48 am EST/EDT

So, the US wants to do to Lebanon what they did to Syria.
- Rhys Jaggar on October 19, 2021 · at 1:29 am EST/EDT
  
  Of course they do. They want to destroy every single civilisation in the Middle East bar Israel.
lyy on October 18, 2021 · at 12:19 pm EST/EDT

Lebanon was artificially created to remain in a quagmire, where the president must be [religion x], the prime-minister [religion y] and the head of Congress [religion z]. This arrangement makes the country ungovernable and only benefits the comprador elite whose assets are in Europe/North America/elsewhere. That’s part of the reason why Macron and former Brazilian president (Catholic Arab) Michel Temer went there – to help the comprador elite.

Stability is important but I wish Hezbollah would seize power and either turn it into an Arab secular republic like Syria or an anti-imperialist Islamic State like Iran.
Ano1999 on October 18, 2021 · at 2:56 pm EST/EDT

The best way is to emulate the Iranians; US embassy should be closed and Lebanon should look eastward.
- Anonymous on October 18, 2021 · at 6:37 pm EST/EDT
  
  Agreed. Also get rid of all the US/West NGO’s.
  - Ano1999 on October 19, 2021 · at 6:39 am EST/EDT
    
    Indeed. I had forgotten about that.
larry, dfh on October 18, 2021 · at 5:12 pm EST/EDT

It’s reported that one of the snipers was a Lebanese employee of the U$ embassy. What’s with the Press in Lebanon? A TV personality stressing cooperation, a reporter identifying & outing a sniper? Is the Press in Lebanon owned to a lesser extent than elsewhere? if so, perhaps the population will resist being dragged into a civil war.
Bobby on October 18, 2021 · at 9:59 pm EST/EDT

From the roofs snipers is classic an American British style of creating a civil war , they did it in Syria , Iraq and elsewhere .
It could be that these people are CIA , MI6 or Mossad agents or collaborators.
Yes I agree , Hezballah should insist on closing the American and British embassies and look east , you can better treatment and help from Iran , Russia and China .
Good luck to all the poor Lebanese who has no control of the issues .
Anonymous on October 18, 2021 · at 10:47 pm EST/EDT

The balance of trade (or net exports, or NX according to economists) in the US has been experiencing retrogressive motion for a long time and is negative, and for the past 46 years (since 1975) this negative has been increasing. According to statistics, just in the month of August 2021, this negative balance surpassed 92 billion dollars.

We know that one of the consequences of this “perpetually in the negative” is that the amount of currency which the US spends on imports, is consistently more than the currency which is gained through exports. But the question arises: is this even possible?! Where has the US been getting the thousands of billions of dollars of cumulative currency over the years? The answer is clear: through the exclusive option of printing universal currency: the dollar; an option which is only available to the US. The truth is, the US has the ability to print dollars in significant quantities and without regulation and without any particular backing, and through the payment of those dollars, receive goods and services!

Trade dollars

Imagine that an Iranian commercial enterprise buys cotton from Cuba and imports it into the country. What will they pay the Cuban company? Rial? It is of no use to the Cuban side, because they cannot use it to trade with others. Peso? The Iranian side can only supply it with difficulty. To solve this problem, and some other problems, at least since the beginning of the 19th century and for 12 decades, the British Pound Sterling was the “universal currency” set forth in the world market, which was replaced by the US dollar in the first half of the 20th century, following the decline of the British empire.

And now the situation is that the US (the only source which prints official universal currency) must provide the Cubans and the Iranians with some dollars, so that they can facilitate their trade. But the US does not provide this currency for free. The US will only provide dollars in exchange for goods and services.

With this simple logic, today there is a large quantity of “trade dollars” in the world, which through this mechanism gives the US the ability to procure goods and services, without paying their proper due. Of course, there are other mechanisms as well, such as the dollar reserves of the world’s central banks, as a backing for national currencies, but for now hold that thought.

A short history

When the Bretton Woods agreement was signed in 1944 (when the universal currency was switched from the pound to the dollar) one of the US commitments was that, any country which pays the US 1 dollar, will receive a specific amount of gold in return (1/35th of an ounce), so the understanding was that whatever quantity of dollars one possesses, there is a corresponding amount of gold to back it up. But this relation between gold and the dollar — for reasons which require their own article — was undone by Richard Nixon in the beginning of the 1970s (the same decade when the US trade deficit began), and what is interesting is that no country protested this! But the dollar began its decline in that same decade, and the dollar empire was heading towards its demise. American politicians, centered around Henry Alfred Kissinger (the US FM at the time), were able to stop the collapse of the dollar with an interesting ploy: in return for an alliance with a few royal families in the Middle East and assurance of their continued survival, the US received the advantage that oil would be sold on the world market only for dollars; an agreement which is still standing, led by the Saudis, and oil continues to be traded on the world market for dollars. Thus, whenever the dollar faces an existential threat, a good way to control the situation, is to increase the world price of oil! This mechanism allows the dollar armory (the Federal Reserve), to print trade dollars, based on the increasing need of the world oil market.

Achilles’ heel

This mechanism, traditionally and of course with US hegemony and threats has been consistently intact for the last half a century. If the officials of any country decide to tread a different path, (like the row with the ill-fated Saddam, who had announced his plan to sell oil for Euros) they will not get out with their lives, and the absolute majority of world leaders wish to keep their heads, and as such they do not wish to get into a fight with this order and system of bullying and racketeering.

But now the headband of maximum pressure on Iran (which logically cannot increase anymore, and which has emptied the clip of the sanctioner of bullets, and according to US Presidents, anything more is mere blanks and propaganda) has presented an unprecedented option for Iran and a few other countries: “the sale of oil for yuan, or any other prevalent currency of international trade.”

There aren’t many people who are not aware of the decline of American economic power, and for a while now the signs of collapse have been rising from within the US itself. The divisions in this country, over the recent elections and also under the influence of covid, has reached its pinnacle, and the face and fate of these states which have been paper clipped together is now clear for all to see. In the foreign dimension, this country which just three decades ago would send its armies anywhere it willed and would annihilate entire countries, today cannot even solve its domestic disputes, also shies away from engaging war-torn nations like Syria, and is retreating in the most humiliating manner from Afghanistan and Iraq and other countries in the region; it does not respond to the unprecedented attack on Ain Al Assad, even if that means its image and grandeur will fully collapse; it withdraws its support for Saudi Arabia and Israel, where one has suddenly become a peace-seeker in the aftermath of the removal of US Patriot systems and extends its hand to Iran in friendship, and the other does not even dare to set a few mines at sea and conduct a blind attack against Lebanese fuel tankers and does not even have the ability to go up against the oppressed and weakened people of the tiny Gaza strip. These are the same that up until a short while ago would massacre camp upon camp of people right in front of the eyes of UN officers and not a question was asked about their murderous acts.

The collapse of the USA now rests on a “dollar flick”.

If Iran:

1. Announces that it will only sell its oil for yuan, or any other currency except the dollar,

And

2. Implicitly (and not even overtly), forms a consortium composed of sanctioned nations or nations at odds with the US, such as Russia, China, Venezuela, Syria, Lebanon, Cuba and a few others, (something like the SCO) and conducts trade with them in the above-mentioned currency,

First of all, it (Iran) will have a much better hand at procuring what it needs; and second, the US trade dollar will quickly lose its demand in the world and a flood of stray dollars will flow towards the US, which will result in an unprecedented hyper-inflation being imposed on this country, which will be beyond the abilities of the US public to handle at this fragile juncture. And this will place the US in a difficult crossroads: war (which it is currently incapable of waging in this sensitive time), or collapse.

With the downhill slope that the US is currently on, this collapse is simply a matter of time; but whether now is precisely the right time or not, must be fully investigated, and its implications for the Iranian economic order must be fully mapped out. But:

– Firstly, for Iran to preempt and breakthrough in accelerating this definite fate is quite relevant,
– And secondly, to evaluate this hypothesis step by step (on levels lower than the above-mentioned plan) is the rational path to the attainment of success.

I remember a discussion which was held with Imran Nazar Hosein five years ago at Tasnim, where he said in a message to Ayatollah Khamenei: “Only Iran has the courage to save the world from “financial Guantanamo”!” A message which received its due reply three months later in a meeting between Ayatollah Khamenei and the heads of the IRGC with the key phrase: “salvation from the financial and monetary magic of the enemy.”

The first comment on this thread put forward the question of how the Resistance will respond to this minor terrorist act in Lebanon. This analysis is intended as a reply to that question, by setting the facts on the board straight.

The Islamic Republic of Iran, the IRGC, and the Resistance have been the masterminds behind the downfall of the USA since the Iranian Revolution of 1979.

It is not the Resistance that must respond to these petty demonstrations of weakness by Israel, but rather, the reality on the ground is that everything the US and Israel have done and continue to do in the region, has been in response to a very serious and concerted Iranian effort in orchestrating the downfall of the USA.

Hezbollah endures these terrorist assaults with a calm disposition, because Hezbollah knows that a flick of the finger by Iran is now all that stands between the US and total collapse.

What I can promise all who are gathered here is that the IRGC will turn the collapse of the USA into a grand public spectacle.

Stay tuned.
- Yk on October 19, 2021 · at 3:16 am EST/EDT
  
  @Anonymous
  
  I read your comment and I should say I’m impressed as always, but I don’t think most of the sanctioned nations are ready for such alliance.
  
  This is found in the fact that most of these nations still have fifth columnists who are working against emergent of such alliance to the favor of the Anglo Zionist empire, while some of these nations are yet to get over there defeatist mentality.
  
  Another reason is that powerful veto wielding nations like China and Russia are simply not interested in such alliance for reasons that are best known to them, though it may be based on stone cold pragmatism; which often means come to there aid only when they are completely down and you can extort the best from them. As president of Belarus said, it is the sanctioned nations that makes the sanctions effective by failing to reach an agreement with each other.
  
  What is happening in Lebanon is part of the larger plan by the US/Zionist which includes what’s taking place between Baku and Tehran presently. The bombing of the Shia mosques in Afghanistan is also part of these plans.
  
  What these means is that the Anglo Zionist empire have come to recognize who the real threat to there empire is, and it is not Russia or China but Iran and the strength of its ideology.
  
  Yes, China is a threat economically to the West but not the Zionist controllers of the world economy, what China is offering is what the Zionist can infiltrate (capitalism in another form) with time just like they did with America after they hollow out the British empire, while the only thing still standing between them and Russia is not her military might but Vladimir Putin. He will definitely not be around forever, and as Saker says Russia system is sustaining on an individual, which is Putin, not on institution though this may change with time I hope as it would be better for the world.
  
  But Iran offers something different which is based on her ideology, whereas Iran is situated in the most strategic corridor of the world, its sorrounded by threats everywhere and is standing alone. The power of this ideology is reflected in some respect on how Hezbollah with Iran support have become a dread to Zionism in occupied Palestine, while Hamas with meager resources have made war on Gaza a very unattractive proposition for the most technologically equipped army in South West Asia, Ansarullah in Yemen is making a mince meat of Saudi Arabia and her mercenaries, with Iran crossing the Atlantic to come to the rescue of a Christian nation at America’s backyard, an ideology that turned a sworn enemy of Iran – the Taliban – into a future strategic partner and Iran with this ideology is not just surviving but waxing stronger and thriving in the face of more than four decades of the most draconic sanctions in history by the combine Western world with occasional connivance of Russia and China.
  
  So I believe the real war which is always ignored or which most people in the world are not aware of is the war between Iran and the global Zionist empire which has infiltrated into the core of every major nations in world, while the world focus on the war of which nation will be the next host of the beastly Zionist capitalism production model.
  
  But Iran’s job is really cutout for her because I don’t believe the empire – whether the Anglo Zionist or the Banco Zionist – will go down without a fight; a kinetic war.
  - Anonymous on October 19, 2021 · at 6:24 am EST/EDT
    
    The Venezuelan FM was in Tehran yesterday, where he met with Amirabdollahian, and work was begun on drafting a 20 year cooperation agreement. Once it is finalized, in a month or two, Maduro will go to Tehran and sign the document.
    
    Iran and Venezuela hold by far the world’s largest oil reserves, at a time when fuel crises are becoming more and more common around the world.
    
    There will come a time, very soon, that Iran will begin to reject US dollars as payment for its oil. China is one of Iran’s biggest oil customers. Are you saying that China will refuse to pay for Iranian oil with yuan?
    
    Venezuela is a bit like Syria, in that the IRGC is running the show there. Both Venezuela and Syria will do whatever the Resistance grand strategy requires.
    
    Cuba will also join the party, when the time comes.
    
    As far as Lebanon is concerned, nobody there could stop Hezbollah from importing Iranian oil. And Miqati now openly says that importing Iranian oil is a violation of Lebanese sovereignty, which is an admission of weakness. When the time comes, Hezbollah will decide for Lebanon, and who can oppose them?
    
    That just leaves Russia. Iran has been conducting a lot of meetings with Russian officials recently to increase ties. Do you think that when the time comes, Russia will choose to back the US dollar?
    
    Russia and China will not fall into line with Iran’s strategy because of an alliance. They will fall in line because it is in their best interest to do so.
    
    Tehran knows full well that everyone in the world is its enemy and an enemy of the Resistance. Hezbollah in Lebanon knows the same. Did anyone offer to help Lebanon when it was in crisis? Do you believe that the Lebanese people missed such a prominent fact?
    
    The Resistance operates based on the knowledge that everyone is an overt or covert enemy, and that ‘support’ for the Resistance’ strategies must perforce be coaxed and manipulated. Do you think that the Russians agreed to enter the Syrian war out of the goodness of their hearts? (BTW, there are big things happening in Syria right now, involving nearly all the players there. I will try to write an update on the situation there tomorrow.)
    
    The Resistance’ strategies are all mapped out, and they are quickly heading for fruition now. Is it a coincidence that the US and Israel have been so remarkably weakened in the last few decades, since the Iranian revolution?
    
    There is much that goes on behind the scenes, that people don’t know about, like the IRGC’s cyber warfare, for example, the scale and scope of which is only coming to light now. And meanwhile the West has been fixated on Iran’s nuclear program, believing the whole time — even up to today — that Iran’s strategy has been to obtain nuclear weapons, and in their deluded thinking they completely missed Iran’s noose which was slipped around the necks of Israel and the US. They still think Iran must be lying when it says it does not seek nuclear weapons!
    
    The Israelis did not know the true power of Gaza until the moment when the 12 day war started, and by then it was far too late to do anything about it.
    
    The Americans continue to compare their fighter jets and their nukes to Iran’s arsenal, and they keep on concluding that all is well with the world. They are the kind of fools that will die without even realizing it.
    
    And last week, Yair Lapid visited the US to discuss what to do about Iran’s lack of enthusiasm for returning to the nuclear talks, and Biden refused to meet with him. The situation on that front requires its own update and analysis, which I will try to get to in the next couple of days.
    
    I agree that the US and the Israelis wouldn’t want to go without a fight. But if we are talking conventional military might and operational capability, then Israel is absolutely irrelevant, it is a sitting duck and it is surrounded. And the US is on the retreat from the region. Will the US bring its forces back to the region?
    
    Where does that leave the Anglo-Zionists? A massive tactical nuclear strike against hundreds of sites in the Middle East simultaneously? Fine, but Israel will be annihilated in the immediate retaliation, together with all US bases and allies in the region, and then the Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb straits will be closed off by guerilla warriors for just long enough to completely bring down the Western economies which are oh so fragile right now. Who knows how many underground cities full of missiles the IRGC and the Houthis have prepared for this scenario?
    
    There is very little that the Anglo-Zionists can do anymore, which is why they are resorting to petty attacks like this one in Beirut. If they could do anything more, they would be attacking the fuel tankers at sea. Why do they not attack the fuel tankers?
    
    If the US collapses, Israel is finished, and an entirely new world will arise with completely new equations of power. I don’t think there is anything the US can do to stop the collapse now, and I think China, Russia and Iran are already planning how to manage the collapse and the aftermath of the collapse.
    
    But the bottom line is: can China and Russia be trusted not to become another USA? And what are the prospects for the rise of a Sino-Zionist empire and a Russo-Zionist empire, after the demise of the Anglo-Zionist empire? And is this the reason why China was propped up and ceaselessly pushed to become the USA’s equal just in the last 40-something years, since the decline of the US started to become apparent?
    
    If another parasitic Zionist empire arises after the fall of the US, Iran will just have to crush them as well, eh?
    
    But we are getting ahead of ourselves. The US and Israel still have one act left on this scene, and that is Erdogan and his Neo-Ottoman imperial shenanigans. And it seems a new chapter of the war is about to begin in Syria, just as the US and Israel have exhausted all of their other options.
    - Yk on October 19, 2021 · at 4:25 pm EST/EDT
      
      That Russia and China are now working with Iran is borne out of the fact that it is in there interest to do so. This is because Iran position has improved considerably compare to few years ago and America is now baring open hostility towards these two just like it is doing with Iran.
      
      Concerning the Venezuelan foreign minister visit to Tehran and the planned 20 years agreement, I would wait for your analysis on that.
      
      A lot seems to be happening this days and it’s becoming difficult to keep up with them especially in the Anglo Zionist confrontation with Iran.
      - Anonymous on October 20, 2021 · at 3:38 am EST/EDT
        
        Indeed a lot is happening these days, and it is becoming harder and harder to keep up.
        
        No details about the Iran-Venezuela agreement are available yet, just that a 20-year deal has been proposed and accepted by both sides.
        
        But the Iranian Armed Forces Chief of Staff General Mohammad Baqeri has been in Moscow for a few days, where he is making deals to purchase military hardware. Again, no details are available about what exactly Iran is looking to procure, but a few guesses are the Sukhoi Su-30, Su-35, Mil Mi-28, and Yak jet trainers.
        
        It is too soon to say for sure, but I believe this time will be different, and Russia won’t take Iran’s money and then refuse to deliver the goods, like they did with the S-300s. More details will be available soon.
        
        And on another note, there have been some dangerous developments in Syria in the past week, such as the attacks by Syrian and Russian forces against the city of Sarmada, in the furthest point in the North of Syria, near the Turkish border.
        
        For the first time in the last seven years, Syrian and Russian forces have targeted the Bab Al-Hawa to Sarmada road. This means that Russia and Damascus have sent a fiery message to Ankara, and they have announced that they are ready to go to the last border point between Syria and the Turkish border.
        
        Why was the city of Sarmada targeted?
        
        This attack is significant because the city of Sarmada is near the Bab Al-Hawa crossing with Turkey, and for years it has been the economic, financial, and commercial center for most of the areas outside of the Syrian government’s control in northern Syria.
        
        Sarmada is under the direct control of the Tahrir al-Sham aka al-Nusra front, and the Bab Al-Hawa crossing is the communication link for northern Syria with the outside world through Turkey.
        
        This attack also carries another message, and that is an economic message. Turkey will not abide by their commitment to Russia to reopen the Latakia to Aleppo international road known as the M4, especially as this road plays an important role in the improvement of the economic situation in Syria.
        
        This attack targeted Tahrir al-Sham positions, which resulted in the deaths of 4 of their commanders and the elimination of centers tied to Watad Petroleum, which is owned by Tahrir al-Sham. Also, a number of other important centers were targeted.
        
        Why has this dangerous and unprecedented development happened now after so many years?
        
        Evidence on the ground indicates that the Turks are starting military movements to take control of Tall Rifat in the North of Aleppo, where Kurdish forces are present.
        
        Tall Rifat is an Arab city which the Kurds have been controlling since 2016, with Russian support.
        
        Turkish planes have dropped flyers on the city, warning of an imminent attack, and asking the inhabitants to move for the cleansing of the city of armed Kurdish elements.
        
        Turkey claims that the attacks against its forces are conducted from Tall Rifat, by the PKK and YPG.
        
        A bomb which recently went off on the Maarat Misrin road, on the path of Turkish troop columns, in addition to killing and wounding a number of Turkish troops, also caused significant damage to Turkish military equipment.
        
        Ankara officials have been making some noise, and issuing open threats to attack Tall Rifat, in light of increasing attacks on Turkish forces in various regions in northern Syria.
        
        And so, Syrian and Russian forces have broken the equation in northern Syria by attacking Sarmada, in order to stop Turkish forces from moving on Tall Rifat, particularly as Russia will not tolerate attacks on Tall Rifat and considers such a move to be the end of the equation.
        
        Northern Syria will be the center of heavy fighting which will put an end to all previous agreements and equations. Russia pins the responsibility on Turkey for not complying with its obligations from the start.
        
        Since Erdogan and Putin’s recent meeting, both sides have begun taking action on the field to put pressure on each other after the failed talks. Drones have taken off from Idlib in order to attack Russia’s Hmeimim in Latakia. And Moscow has taken military action against armed groups in northern Syria, and perhaps Moscow has even given Kurdish groups a free hand to conduct operations against Turkish forces inside Syria.
        
        This has pushed Ankara to enter Tall Rifat. Clashes in northern Syria have currently intensified, and all sides are prepared to follow through to the end. There is only two possibilities; either war will completely change the equation in Idlib, or a return to negotiations and a new agreement will.
        
        These days things are not going well for Erdogan, not inside Turkey, and not on the international scene, and especially not in Syria. In the domestic front, the value of the Lira has fallen, and the support base for Imamoglu, the mayor of Istanbul, and a likely opposition candidate in the next Presidential elections, has increased.
        
        Perhaps Erdogan’s biggest worry abroad these days is the increasing tension between Russia and Turkey on the one hand, and the US and Turkey on the other. Disagreements between Turkey and Russia have manifested themselves in Syria in a negative light. The interpretation of these disagreements is direct or indirect military conflict, and options for solving the situation are very limited.
        
        The recent meeting between Erdogan and Putin in Sochi included tensions, according to the Russians, and no agreements were reached about anything. A two and a half hour meeting ended without any results, because of Erdogan’s insistence on not upholding his commitments from the 2019 Sochi Agreement, the most noteworthy being the eviction of the Al-Nusra front from Idlib.
        
        Accordingly, any new Turkish military assault will just intensify attacks against Turkish forces in the multiple fronts in Idlib.
        
        Erdogan’s big difficulty, which has led him to ignore his commitments in the 2019 Sochi Agreement, is the fate of the terrorists in Idlib which are under Ankara’s protection. Erdogan cannot convince them to cooperate with the Syrian government, similar to what happened in Daraa.
        
        Erdogan also cannot just pack the terrorists who are against peace with the Syrian government and against laying down their arms into buses and ship them to Turkey, because they number in the tens of thousands.
        
        Turkey’s new operation in Syria to challenge Russia and the Syrian government and to target Kurds in eastern Syria like the SDF, means that dozens of Turkish forces will end up killed and wounded, and a large number of Syrians — perhaps hundreds of thousands — will flee the war and move to Turkey, and the question is: how will the Turkish President deal with all this?
        
        I realize that this is all going off-topic with regards to the recent Beirut attack, but all of this is related in the grand scheme of things, eg. the Resistance vs the US and its allies, and there is hardly ever a Syria update here, and things are happening so fast nowadays that if a development isn’t immediately reported and analysed and placed in its proper position on the board, it is wont to be lost in the massive flood of things that are happening every day. In any case, this is the situation on the Syria-Turkey front.
        
        Meanwhile, on the US-Israel front, and in regards to the Iranian nuclear deal, which is perhaps even further off-topic here, and I hope amarynth will not yell at me, :P
        
        It seems the presence of the Democrats at the head of the US has not been very pleasant for the Zionist regime. Based on designs that Trump had prepared for their benefit in his 4 years in office, they had in turn prepared themselves for a period of expansion in Palestine, mass evictions of Palestinians, and extensive strikes against the Resistance Axis in West Asia. But with the coming of Biden, all of their hopes were dashed. While it should be noted that different US administrations are not really different in terms of American imperial goals, but this time around there have been massive disagreements in adapting US policy with Israeli demands, which has resulted in Zionist officials repeatedly leaving Washington and returning to the occupied territories empty handed.
        
        The Zionist regime’s FM’s visit to Washington
        
        Last week Yair Lapid, the Zionist FM traveled to the US. By all accounts, the central point of this visit was to discuss the Iran case. Before the actual meeting, Israeli and Western media outlets were publishing analyses claiming that the meeting would bring about great developments in regards to the Iran case.
        
        In the meeting of Lapid and Blinken, where the US FM announced that if Iran does not agree to return to the negotiations the US will try other options, the media blew his statement out of proportion and made it seem like the US was announcing readiness to go to war against Iran. But all of it ended right there, and nothing more was heard about that in the US
        
        What revealed that the Western media’s interpretation of Blinken’s words was incorrect, was the news of Biden’s refusal to meet with the Israeli FM. Biden did not even accept to sit down with Yair Lapid for a few minutes, which implied that Biden was taking his own way, and that he does not care what the Israeli regime wants.
        
        After Lapid’s trip to the US, the Zionist media reflected Israeli political analysts as saying that the FM’s visit to Washington was a complete failure. They also stated that Lapid’s request that Washington set a deadline and an ultimatum for Iran’s return to the nuclear negotiations was firmly rejected, and Biden also conveyed to the Zionists that he did not want to hear anything about military options against Iran. These media outlets asserted that Joe Biden thinks so little of Lapid, that he would not even meet with him for a few minutes.
        
        A history of Zionist officials’ visits to Washington under Biden
        
        In the last year where Biden has been the US President, numerous Israeli officials have visited the US, and the central theme of all of their talks has been Iran.
        
        The first Zionist official to visit the US was Yossi Cohen, former Mossad chief. He was in the US for nearly a month while Biden had still not officially taken office, and the result of this trip was seemingly a non-hostile relationship between Netanyahu and Biden, which as it later turned out during the 12 day war, had not really been that successful.
        
        The second Israeli official was Aviv Kochavi, Chief of General Staff of the Israel Defense Forces. He was in the US to coordinate on military and security issues. The results of his trip with regards to Iran also did not amount to more than a few vague remarks.
        
        Benny Gantz was the third Israeli official to visit the US to discuss military projects and Iran. Like the other officials, he also did not make the results of his visit public, and simply stated that the results were substantial. But the truth is that if there had been any substance to speak of from any of the trips, surely it would have been presented in the media as psychological warfare.
        
        The fifth Zionist regime official to meet with Biden was Reuven Rivlin, the former President of this regime, who met with Biden during the last days of his own Presidency. In this meeting Biden said that diplomacy was his priority, and that if Iran did not cooperate in the diplomatic arena, he would then think about other options.
        
        The sixth official of the Zionist regime who went to Washington was Naftali Bennett. He went to the US a little under a month ago, and met with Biden. Biden said the same thing to Bennett that he had said to Rivlin; that the US had made diplomacy its priority.
        
        Now Lapid’s trip to Washington was even weaker and bore fewer results than the previous visits, and was met with outright inhospitality by the Americans. Biden refused to meet him, and the Zionist media termed the whole thing an utter defeat.
        
        This shows the existence of disagreement and a serious rift between the United States and the Zionist regime, which is continuously deepening. It appears that the Zionists have more difficult days ahead after this, and for the future of their relations with the US, they should also expect many more difficult days.
        
        The big picture is, the US and Israel and Turkey and the Saudis and all those guys are in shambles, and most of them are close to collapse, while Europe is facing a gas and electricity crisis, like some third world country.
        
        Meanwhile,
        
        https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-19/china-private-refiners-may-import-more-iran-oil-in-buying-frenzy — “China Private Refiners May Import More Iran Oil in Buying Frenzy”
        
        And on the Russian front, Iran seems finally set to obtain the Sukhoi Su-30s which they’ve been unsuccessfully pursuing for the better part of a decade.
        
        The reality on the ground is that Iran, China, and Russia are the furthest thing from collapsing right now, whereas the other side are clearly on the brink of some kind of massive catastrophic collapse.
        
        The Hezbollahis in Lebanon know how dire the situation of the enemy is, and they know how desperate the enemy is to be resorting to shooting people on the streets of Beirut. Considering the big picture, and the Shia ethos of the Hezbollahis, what one arrives at is: “Let them kill us. We will happily die martyrs for this cause. We will not strike back and start a civil war.”
        
        So, this latest terrorist act will amount to nothing more than just another failed attempt by the Zionist regime and the US, just like all their other terrorist acts.
        
        Yk on October 20, 2021 · at 11:23 am EST/EDT
        
        Thanks for another comprehensive analysis 👍
        
        Anonymous on October 21, 2021 · at 3:36 am EST/EDT
        
        There is a story about Ali ibn Musa Al Reza, the eighth Shia Imam, whose shrine is at Mashhad. It is told that one day a young man went to visit the Imam, and he complained about his poor financial situation at length, and in the end requested that the Imam help him out.
        
        Now, bear in mind that when the Shia speak of Imam Reza, or any of the twelve Imams, they are talking about someone like Nasrallah, but even more powerful in terms of spiritual power, and more knowledgeable in terms of spiritual knowledge. Think Super Nasrallah.
        
        Anyway, the young man was quite distressed and worked up at that point, and when he asked the Imam for help, ie. a handout, the Imam offered him a bunch of grapes.
        
        The young man, naturally quite offended, rejected the grapes and stormed off mumbling inanities.
        
        Then the next visitor who was waiting to see the Imam was led in to see him. An older man, who had come to see the Imam for counsel. The Imam offered him a bunch of grapes as he sat down. The man graciously accepted them and said thank you.
        
        The Imam then offered him the whole plate of grapes. Again, the man graciously accepted and thanked the Imam, at which point the Imam offered him the vineyard where the grapes came from, and signed the deed over to him on the spot. And of course, the man could hardly find the words to express his gratitude, he accepted the very generous gift and thanked the Imam profusely.
        
        The Shia believe that being grateful for what one receives in life, and acknowledging and thanking God for even the smallest things that one is given, will increase one’s blessings, and the more humbly and graciously one acknowledges and gives thanks, the more God provides, for God is the most generous.
        
        Now, I am certainly no Imam, Yk, but you better be careful with all of your thanks, lest you find yourself buried under a pile of analyses!
        
        Here is another one, which although slightly off-topic again, I hope that amarynth and the Saker will continue to accommodate, as they have been accommodating so hospitably so far.
        
        The Zionist regime’s fears
        
        One word that one sees very often in the headlines of the Zionist media nowadays is “worry”, but of course this is nothing new, and Israel and all of its Cabinets since the founding of this pseudo-state and the occupation of Palestine have been consistently living with anxiety and worry for one reason or another.
        
        Israelis are perpetually worried about domestic and foreign enemies, and are constantly thinking how to protect themselves from dangers at home and abroad.
        
        This sense of tension and anxiety in the Zionist establishment has been there since the time of its founding right up to today, and will continue to be there until the day they are destroyed, but even so, Israel in its current stage and under the leadership of Naftali Bennett finds itself plagued by grave worries, and from what one sees reported in the Israeli media, the likelihood of the collapse of Naftali Bennett’s Cabinet is not small; because its current state is quit fragile and the members of this cabinet cannot even agree on the most trivial matters.
        
        Here are some of the Zionists’ worries:
        
        Israel’s fear of improving relations between Jordan and Syria and Iran
        
        The first item on the list of the Zionists’ worries is the diffusing of tensions in the relations between Syria and Jordan, and the improving ties between these two has the Israeli side very worried. Zionist spectators by pointing out Jordan’s prior stance against Syria and Abdullah II the king of Jordan’s statements issued against Bashar Assad the Syrian President in 2016, emphasize that the current sudden change in Man’s position with regards to Damascus has been quite unexpected for Israel and is causing them to worry.
        
        But the Zionists’ worry is not limited to just Syria-Jordan relations. On October 12th, the Israeli newspaper Makor Rishon published a report titled “the worrying alignment between Jordan and Iran”. According to this report, what had caused the Zionists to worry was a phone conversation between Amirabdollahian and his Jordanian counterpart Ayman Safadi. In this conversation Amirabdollahian thanked Jordan’s historical role in the custodianship of al-Quds and other Islamic and Christian sites in this city against the Zionist regime’s efforts to enforce its rule over these sacred sites. The two sides also stressed the need to expand regional cooperation removed from foreign interference and the expansion of cooperation between regional states, particularly Iran, Iraq, Syria and Jordan.
        
        In 1994 Jordan signed the Wadi Araba agreement with the Zionist regime, whereby it committed that no foreign military force will be permitted to use Jordan’s soil or airspace to conduct attacks against the occupied territories. In the phone call between Iran and Jordan’s FMs there was absolutely no mention of military matters, or the use of Jordan’s soil by Iranian military forces, or cooperation on nuclear matters and also nothing was mentioned regarding military, security or intelligence cooperation, but even so, it seems that a mere phone call about economic cooperation between Iran and Jordan worries the Zionists; because stable cooperation between regional countries and Iran is Israel’s most important cause for worry as it hinders this regime’s strategic designs.
        
        Rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia and worry in Zionist circles
        
        Another one of the main causes of intense worry for the Zionists recently has been the ongoing negotiations between Iran and Saudi Arabia and the possibility of a detente between the two in the not so distant future.
        
        Haaretz recently published an article emphasizing that an Iran-Saudi detente may well end the anti-Iran coalition in the region; because if the negotiations between these two bears fruit, it will effectively signal the end of the anti-Iranian coalition; a coalition that the Israelis had high hopes for.
        
        The writer of that article stressed that the resolution of disagreements between Iran and Saudi Arabia will encourage other Arab states to swiftly follow suit.
        
        The writer also expressed worry regarding the Jordanian FM’s remarks about good relations with Iran in the phone call with Amirabdollahian.
        
        In addition to this, before the phone call with Jordan’s FM, the Iranian FM had traveled to Lebanon where the met with Michel Aoun the President, Najib Miqati the PM, Nabih Berri the Parliament Speaker, and also Hasan Nasrallah the Hezbollah chief. Amirabdollahian presented generous offers on behalf of the Islamic Republic in regards to building power plants, repairing the Beirut port, and other economic projects to help the Lebanese nation.
        
        These proposals by Iran to Lebanon are another main reason for the Zionist regime’s current worries. And based on this, in order to create conflict among the various Lebanese groups, the Zionists decided to profess the claim that the gas which Egypt proposes to provide Lebanon is actually Israeli gas and that Lebanese officials know this. The point of making this claim was to send a message for some who are seeking normalization of ties with the Zionist regime so as to make their relationship with this regime public.
        
        Israel’s fear of the Iraqi elections
        
        Regardless of the results of the Iraqi elections, the Zionists even worried about the peaceful proceeding of this election and the participation of all Iraqi popular groups in it, and this is why a few days before the Iraqi Parliament election, the Zionists through their mercenaries organized the Erbil conference on the normalizing of ties, in order to create tensions in Iraq before the elections and obstruct the election from proceeding properly.
        
        But the fact that the election was held without any kind of sectarian tension, and also the fact that all Iraqis oppose the normalization of ties with the Zionist regime and label the participants in the Erbil conference as traitors, has created a very non-conducive situation for the Israelis and their goals, and shows that even the smallest new sedition in Iraq can lessen the burden of Israel’s worries.
        
        A nuclear Iran; Israel’s nightmare
        
        Israel has serious worries about Iran’s political campaign against Azerbaijan due to the presence of ISIS cells in this country, and also the presence of Zionist military-intelligence bases there; because Israel wants to turn Azerbaijan into a secure bed for conducting anti-Iranian activity.
        
        The Zionist regime is also intensely worried about the US imminent return to the nuclear deal with Iran, and has been trying to derail this process in any way possible. Yair Lapid, the Israeli FM revealed the Zionist regime’s true position in this regard when he said to the Americans that, Israel does not want Iran to even be on the threshold of becoming a nuclear state, and even if they don’t build nuclear weapons, they should not be allowed to benefit from any kind of nuclear ability.
        
        These remarks by the Israeli FM reveals that what is causing the Zionist regime’s worry is not really nuclear weapons, but rather the existence of knowledge and technology and the ability in Iran which allow Iran the opportunity to become a developed nation, and this is the true root of Israeli worry. Global Zionism, in spite of all the opposed currents in the Middle East, sees the region as a tremendous opportunity for Israel, and in their view, no other power in the Middle East must be allowed to compete with Israel in the field of science and technology. And this is why Yair Lapid asked Jake Sullivan to propose an alternate plan for Iran’s return to the nuclear deal.
        
        The Zionists’ fear of the Palestinian Resistance
        
        Israel has never been able to hide its worry about any kind of agreement between the various Palestinian factions; because it is worried about the abilities of the Resistance in Gaza and their expansion in the West Bank and occupied Jerusalem, and this is why Tel Aviv in cooperation with the US and Egypt has been attempting to pressure the Palestinian Resistance in regards to the prisoner swap, and they are also very worried about the Palestinian Authority’s ever-fading position in the eyes of Palestinians.
        
        The Zionist regime wants peace on its southern front, so that it can complete its project of settlement building in occupied al-Quds and the Judaization of Holy Jerusalem, but at the same time they are worried about the reaction of the Palestinian Resistance groups.
        
        And they are also extremely worried about the Americans’ positions, who are insisting that stability in the Middle East in the absence of US forces requires the formation of a Palestinian government and the delineation of the limits of its independence and rule; something the Israelis will never accept. Washington also believed that the normalization of ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel without arriving at a comprehensive solution to the Israel-Palestine issue is not possible, meanwhile the Zionist regime sees normalization of ties with Riyadh as a guarantee that Iran will not become closely tied with the Saudis and other Arab countries.
        
        Stability in Syria and Israel’s fear
        
        Israel is also afraid of Russia’s increasing pressure to stop attacks against Syria, and is worried about US-Russia agreements to solve the conflict in Syria. The Zionists’ are extremely worried about Syria regaining its military and economic power and infrastructure.
        
        Israel is also worried about the defeat of its allies in Syria, such as the al-Nusra front and other terrorists, and it is scared that the current political and social stability in Syria may continue, and this is why the Zionist regime’s PM has started making claims about the occupied Golan and the expansion of Zionist settlements in this region.
        
        And on the other hand, Israel is really worried about Iran’s stability and its regaining of economic power and the development of this country in regards to science and technology and the cooperation of Arab countries with Tehran, and is very worried about the formation of an Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon axis which will connect Iran to the Mediterranean Sea; even if this axis will be a purely economic one.
        
        The Arabs’ deluded hope in crisis-stricken Israel
        
        The Zionist regime is also worried about the Beirut port being repaired; because this port is a competitor to the large port of Haifa on the Mediterranean coast, and is an easier alternative for Middle Eastern countries who wish to establish connections to Europe.
        
        While Israel deals with these challenges, some Arab regimes express that getting closer to Israel can assuage their own feelings of anxiety and fear! What deluded fools they are. History shows that whenever Arabs have gotten close to Israel, it has always been a one-sided relationship only to Israel’s benefit and the biggest goal of the Zionist regime is the total annihilation of all Arabs.
        
        Meanwhile,
        
        https://newsmedia.tasnimnews.com/Tasnim/Uploaded/Image/1397/03/14/1397031418183115314326824.jpeg — the US base at al-Tanf was attacked by 5 drones, and it was also struck by rockets. No deaths have been reported.
        
        CENTCOM has stated that its base at al-Tanf was the target of a coordinated attack.
        
        CENTCOM, which is designated a terrorist group by Iran, has also stated that it reserves the right to retaliate against the attack at a time and place of its choosing.
        
        Yk on October 21, 2021 · at 7:41 am EST/EDT
        
        @Anonymous
        
        Thanks for the compliment and many thanks for offering more analysis on Iran.
        
        What Islamic Iran has been able to achieve is nothing short of a miracle going by the herculean opposition they faced from one of the most powerful empire in history, yet they still supported other nations in the region and outside the region. This is a testament to the fact that Islamic Iran is led by best of the best, lay emphasise on merit without actually becoming a meritocracy, and in my personal belief Islamic Iran is on the side of the Truth.
        
        The Zionist worries have been aggravated with the new Iran administration led by an astute president Ayatollah Raisi and foreign minister AmirAbdollahian who is the face of the administration’s foreign policy. Both belong to the Resistance School of Thought and have shown their unrelenting commitment towards providing deep support for the Axis of Resistance across the region. This brings me to another point which is the internal economy of Iran. For Iran to continue providing robust support to the Axis, it need to unleash the potential of her private sector so as to avoid internal disillusionment by her citizens. I for one do not believe in the government providing jobs or creating businesses, as it is the incubator for corruption in the society. I believe government should provide infrastructures, supervising and laws for citizens to create businesses and thrive. So my question would come from this perspective.
        
        Iran president few days ago was interviewed by a local station where Ayatollah Raisi talked about some of his administration’s program. He talked about his promised 4 million housing units within four years and make it clear this would be carryout by the private sector with government just supervising and guiding. While this new line of thinking is impressive – with the effect it will have on job creation by the private sector – I’m skeptical as the president himself said many are in Iran about the fulfillment of this goal.
        
        What’s your opinion of Iran private sector capacity to execute this project and enabling conditions?
        
        Then secondly, Ayatollah Raisi spoke about his administration having not borrowed a dime from the bank since he assumed office and his plan to fashion the budget based on reality which would curb inflation. Though this is another great move in the right direction in my opinion. However, is this sustainable for Iran economy in the long run given its present state?
        
        Sorry for turning this into a kind of lecture session, for someone like me I learn more from practicable policies and analysis than theoretical propagation and I have come to accept the fact that if Iran have come this far, it is because her policies are based on realistic assessments. Thanks once again.
        
        Anonymous on October 22, 2021 · at 11:10 pm EST/EDT
        
        “What’s your opinion of Iran private sector capacity to execute this project and enabling conditions?
        
        Then secondly, Ayatollah Raisi spoke about his administration having not borrowed a dime from the bank since he assumed office and his plan to fashion the budget based on reality which would curb inflation. Though this is another great move in the right direction in my opinion. However, is this sustainable for Iran economy in the long run given its present state?”
        
        Unfortunately, I have to disappoint you. Iranian domestic policy is outside of my field of expertise, and I am not qualified to comment on your questions.
        
        The Iranian domestic front became a shit show under Rouhani. A real tragic spectacle, with incompetent idiots running everything into the ground.
        
        Iran and the Resistance are lucky that the IRGC is fully independent, and the Iranian government has no jurisdiction over it, otherwise Rouhani and Zarif would have burned the whole thing down.
        
        But regarding your comments on privatization, and bear in mind that I hold no position on this matter personally, as I am not a statesmen or a politician, merely a simple soldier, but I am aware of some developments on that front.
        
        Many companies and factories which were privatized under the Ahmadinejad administration, were completely shut down in the Rouhani period. And one of the crises that Raisi is facing now is to revive a significant portion of Iranian industrial production capabilities, which were shut down for various reasons under the previous administration. Some of these reasons are at least superficially similar to what neo-liberalism has done in the West.
        
        Imagine that you acquired some company from the Iranian state, with a factory and hundreds of employees. You run the company for a few years producing whatever. You find that you have a market share for the commodity which you produce, right? Then you find that if you import the same item from China and sell it to your market base in Iran, you can make a guaranteed profit, without the hassle of running a factory with hundreds of employees, and all the risks of running a company. So, you tell all your workers to take a hike, close down the production line, and open up an import office, where you sit down and rake in money, while you pray for the Chinese’ health.
        
        The Iranian state was running these factories and production lines as a matter of national interest, for jobs, for production, for national prosperity, etc. The private sector gutted them and moved to imports from China.
        
        And this is the same thing that happened in the West. Simply put, corporations took over crucial industries, and in doing so also took power over the state and its legislature where corporate lobbies now dictate government policy and the will of the people is literally the most irrelevant thing to government policy, and the bottom line is that those corporations moved all production to China for a bigger profit.
        
        When you speak of privatization, I feel like we need to paint a bigger picture of what it is exactly that we are talking about, so I will describe the commercial atmosphere of Iran.
        
        I wonder if you have ever been to Iran, Yk? Something that most Western people notice immediately upon arrival in Iran is the conspicuous absence of all transnational corporations, and this fact sets Iran apart from virtually all of the rest of the world, including China and Russia.
        
        In Iran, you will not see McDonald’s, Walmart, Shell, or any of the other hundreds of well known brands that dominate the commercial landscape of Western countries. Instead, you will see Uncle Asghar’s corner burger joint, and more often than not, right next to it you will find Uncle Akbar’s sandwich joint. And the more you walk along the streets of Iranian towns and cities, the more you will see individual Iranians running their own little businesses. From supermarkets and grocery stores, to fruit shops and hardware stores, to clothing shops and butchers, 99% of the time, the businesses will be owned by just average people, and you will almost always find the owner in his shop dealing with customers.
        
        If you take a walk through any industrial estate on the outskirts of the towns and cities, you will again see the same thing. Small workshops or massive warehouses, owned by just regular people, who you will usually find in the workshop working away. And the same applies to Iranian farms, which are 99% owned by Average Joe farmers, and there is no such thing as a gazillion hectare corporate plantation where everything is mechanized and there is no human involvement at all.
        
        So, I don’t really understand your question about disillusionment by Iranian citizens. Starting your own business is as easy as 1-2-3 in Iran. There is very little regulation. And most importantly, there are no transnational corporations making business literally impossible for you. And an Iranian rural family can make a very comfortable living and a decent income from 1 hectare of farmland, an impossibility in the West, even though Iranians cannot export their produce because of sanctions! (Just as a sidebar here, pomegranates, a fruit which are native to Iran, and of which Iran produces 1 million metric tons per year, are sold for 50-70 cents USD per kg retail on the Iranian market, whereas in Australia a single rotten-looking pomegranate that Iranians would not deem edible can go for up to 10-15 dollars! Imagine the living an Iranian farmer could make if they could export pomegranates. Meanwhile, Israeli pomegranates can now be purchased in Dubai: https://gulfnews.com/uae/dubais-fresh-market-opens-first-ever-display-of-israeli-produce-including-fruit-and-vegetables-1.75275398 )
        
        Anyway, I would think that Western people should be disillusioned because the only realistic options for a decent income in Western countries is to become an “employee”.
        
        Now, the word employee has a special connotation in Iran. There is an Iranian expression that says “kaar aar nist”, which translates to “work is not dishonor.” The reason such an expression exists in Iran in the first place, is because the Iranian mentality sees working for someone else as the very embodiment of dishonor. The word “kargar” in Farsi means worker, but denotes a manual laborer, which is the most dishonorable and disgraceful thing that a person can be, as far as Iranians are concerned. So, the government had to coin a new term, “karmand” which translates to employee, and refers to people who work in an office, like government employees, a term which is not imbued with the same negative connotation as “kargar”, and in some rural areas can even be quite prestigious.
        
        The way to become a “karmand” is to get a university education. Without an education, one is doomed to “karegari”. Now, don’t get me wrong, nobody will judge anyone else for being a kargar in Iran, in fact, everyone will say “kaar aar nist” when referring to others. It is rather that people feel dishonored and disgraced themselves, in their own heart of hearts, if they have to go work for someone else every day for a relatively meagre wage, while the person they are working for makes significantly more off their labor. So, Iranian parents will do everything they can to make sure their children get an education, and are spared the humiliation of “karegari” ie. being a worker.
        
        Now, this brings us back to the fact that so many Iranians own their own little businesses or shops, and happily go to work every day; because they own their business, and they don’t have to work for someone else.
        
        I have never been able to understand how Western people (or Chinese people) happily endure what is essentially slavery, but I am resigned to the fact that my intellect is not enough to solve all the mysteries of the universe. And if the Iranian government can make slavery honorable just by changing the word kargar to karmand, then it is no surprise if the West and China have billions of people working in sweatshops, and choosing to get experimental vaccines rather than lose their jobs!!
        
        But, back to privatization. The simple picture which I have painted of Iran, is the basic framework of the Iranian private sector. There are small shops where a father and son sell hamburgers, and there are massive enterprises with thousands of employees and share holders with their stocks being traded on the Iranian stock exchange.
        
        If this is what a private sector looks like, then I personally find it difficult to relate this to the West and the wider world, where a handful of super-massive conglomerates own and control an endless array of companies, while they dictate policy to helpless states and governments that have literally no power at all.
        
        I am no expert, but that is not a private sector. I would call that, states which have been hijacked by corporate power, where the corporations are now essentially the state. And I would label this whole circus: Global Zionism, because more often than not, the corporations are owned or controlled by Jews.
        
        So, to a simple mind like me, it seems like the Jews used privatization together with a host of other ploys to wrest control of states from their respective governments. Governments which are now so weak, that they must sit and quietly acquiesce to policies which are dictated to them by corporate and financial interests.
        
        Now, in most countries, privatization meant that transnational corporations swept in and bought everything and moved it to China, so a handful of Wall Street billionaire Jewish shareholders, who own shares in absolutely everything, could make even more profit. But in Iran, where those corporations were banned from entering, indeed precisely because of their ties to Global Zionism, Iranians bought the companies which were being privatized and shut them down and moved their production to China themselves!
        
        And now Raisi goes from town to town, visiting all these shuttered abandoned factories, wondering how to revive them, while endlessly making promises to do so.
        
        Last month, Ayatollah Khamenei banned the import of all Korean home appliances. A very significant move that for the most part went under the radar in the West. Kudos to him, three cheers for Khamenei.
        
        This is what Iran needs, in my opinion. To completely stop importing garbage which is already being produced in Iran. There are dozens of Iranian brands of home appliances, and they produce absolutely everything. So, importing Korean products is tantamount to betrayal of Iranian industry.
        
        So, based on this simple logic, importing anything from China is like stabbing Iranian industry in the back.
        
        They said don’t go up against the US militarily, you will lose.
        
        Now they say don’t go up against China industrially, you will lose.
        
        So, what is the way forward then, in your opinion Yk, when privatization seems to lead to industries being moved to China? Just so we are clear, China can and does offer to sell products to Iran at a loss, so that Iranian industries will go belly up.
        
        While many in the Iranian establishment are enthusiastically turning East (because they foresee great wealth to be made for themselves through importing Chinese rubbish) others can see clear as day that another USA is being created with phenomenal speed, where the weaknesses of the USA have seemingly been fully addressed.
        
        But meanwhile, from the front where I actually know a thing or two, and where things are going well:
        
        A US analyst, senior fellow and the Director of the Syria and Countering Terrorism & Extremism programs at the Middle East Institute, tweeted the following leaked images from the al-Tanf base, with the message:
        
        “Judging from leaked images, the [#Iran] drone & rocket attack on al-Tanf in SE #Syria (home to U.S. troops) on Weds night was quite significant.
        
        DOD confirmed the attack, but has provided no other info — clearly being hushed up, to avoid hype/escalation.”
        
        https://mobile.twitter.com/Charles_Lister/status/1451531761989607434
        
        The base was equipped with air defenses, BTW, and as usual, the IRGC gave the US prior warning to evacuate the base, which the US did, knowing full well that their air defenses would be useless.
        
        Yk on October 23, 2021 · at 4:22 am EST/EDT
        
        I hope and pray to visit Iran and the shrine of Imam Reza (as) soon.
        
        I hope you can forgive me for pestering you for more and more on Iran. The way I see it, Ayatollah Raisi will do what is necessary to revive most of these industries because apart from being an honorable man, he appears to know what he is doing and how to go about getting it done. A recently galop poll on his short term in office is a testament to this.
        
        https://news.gallup.com/poll/355973/iranians-show-faith-new-president.aspx
        
        The Achilles heel of the government of Iran to date has been the economy, however through the Economy of Resistance’s prescription that the new administration is focused on, through a leap in production, manufacturing and exportation of non oil sector by exploring the markets of neighboring countries and nations like Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and some other African countries who care less about the sanctions, Iran will eventually become sanction proof economically just like it became militarily impossible to invade.
        
        I am of the opinion that Ayatollah Raisi will pull it off because he is just like a political Qassem Soleimani, someone who work more in the field than from behind the desk.
        
        Anonymous on October 25, 2021 · at 2:58 am EST/EDT
        
        Here is a short history and analysis of the Iranian economy over the last 40 years, specifically under the Hashemi and Khatami administrations, so you can understand what is going on in Iran a bit better, Yk. And Lebanon is currently set to begin negotiations with the IMF, so the lessons here pertain to Lebanon as well.
        
        The root of many of Iran’s economic problems today go back to the 26-article agreement between Iran and the IMF during the Hashemi and Khatami administration, which was the basis for the economic structural adjustment policies began by Hashemi and continued by Khatami.
        
        During the Hashemi administration, views and suggestions offered by the IMF were taken into consideration, but no formal document making commitments to the IMF was drafted. One night in late April 1999, after a government meeting, the economic minister of the Khatami reformist government of the time, Dr. Hosein Namazi, was handed a folder from the Central Bank on the steps on the way out of the meeting and told to “sign this”. He replied: “I must study it first.” Inside the folder was a letter addressed to Mr. Camdessus the Managing Director of the IMF. The text of the agreement contained 26 articles with explanations in 19 pages with Farsi translations which had to be signed by the Central Bank director, the Vice President, the head of the Planning and Budget Organization, and the Economic Minister, and also, the name of Mr. Camdessus was written as a signatory. (The letter was dated April 29, 1999)
        
        The creation of a market-based order of pricing and foreign exchange, pricing reforms and the increase of petroleum product prices on the domestic market, the need to eliminate all implicit subsidies and price regulations, the abolition of governmental price control (interest rates) and service fees in favor of determination by banks, permission for non-banking private financial institutions, allowing banks more freedom and the utilization of specialist advisors from the World Bank and IMF, the determination of foreign exchange prices through the market mechanism, and the abolition of restrictions on imports were some of the most important clauses of this agreement.
        
        In practice, this agreement basically went into action in 1989 with the start of the Hashemi administration in Tehran, in line with policies of de-escalation as the “Structural Adjustment Policies”. At that time, Hashemi was keen to find someone for the Economic Minister role who would not only work towards implementing the IMF strategy, but would also believe in the strategy in their own heart. And so, Mr. Nurbakhsh was chosen for the position, and right off the bat he started on negotiations and agreements with the World Bank and the IMF, and slowly these policies were put in action, and as a result prices began to go up, and the increase in price of foreign exchange (eg. dollar) accelerated, and the ground was prepared for the Iranian people’s dissatisfaction.
        
        In 1993, at the start of Mr. Hashemi’s second term, the Parliament did not give their vote of confidence to Mr. Nurbakhsh, and Hashemi appointed him as Vice President for Economic Affairs. In Mr. Hashemi’s second term, these policies continued, and in 1995 the inflation rate in Iran hit 50% and the dollar reached 800 Tomans (8000 Rials). And in the reformist government which commenced in 1997, Mr. Khatami officially announced that “my economic policy is the same as Mr. Hashemi’s economic policy.” And Mr. Nurbakhsh whose 4-year term as the Central Bank director had still not ended, continued in this role.
        
        In the end, because of Mr. Namazi’s written letter to the President and further discussions with him resulted in the agreement with the IMF never getting signed. But even though the document was not signed, and Iran did not agree to make any commitments to the IMF, but the provisions in the agreement were implemented into Iranian law by the government. The proponents of the agreement, who had lost hope in the thing getting signed, announced to the IMF that the provisions of the agreement had been legislated and passed into Iranian law, and their adoption was mandatory by the government.
        
        But let us go back to the beginning years of the Islamic Republic, where the President of the time, Mr. Banisadr, had stated that “there is not a single penny in the Treasury, and the Islamic Republic is finished.” So, how did the Iranians manage an 8-year war with an empty Treasury?
        
        Banisadr’s full statement followed with: “Finished is a gross understatement, it has already collapsed, and its last rite has also been recited. I am referring to the regime, which will also collapse soon and be done for good.”
        
        Regarding the Treasury, we know that based on predictions of income and expenses in the yearly budget, every day the Treasury has incomings and outgoings. If there is a delay in receiving some of the incomes, it is possible that some expenses will also be delayed based on priorities or arrangements will be made to make up for the decrease in income, so to say that the Treasury is empty and so the government or the country will collapse is incorrect, and as we have seen, nothing of the sort happened. As the Treasurer of the time stated, the light in the Treasury is always on. But there were indeed some difficulties. And of course the economic conditions of the country were in a special situation under the influence of the war. According to reports by the Trade Minister of the time, the entire grain stocks of the whole country amounted to a mere 3 day supply. Imagine if flour did not reach the bakeries, what kinds of things could have happened, but all the problems were overcome with the efforts and truly significant sacrifices of the people and the government.
        
        So, how is it that back then during the war, the government was able to manage the affairs of the country, but today when conditions are relatively so much better, the situation is so dire and popular dissatisfaction is so widespread?
        
        One of the reasons that during the war Iran did not lose an inch of soil to Iraq, and eventually Iraq was even condemned to pay reparations as the aggressor who started the war, was the Iranian people’s endless support on and off the field of battle. The people believed in the government and the system and did what they could to help out.
        
        An important and noteworthy point is that the absolute majority of government officials were financially in the same boat as the average people, and they understood the people’s problems and also the people saw them as part of themselves.
        
        Another important reason was that the government was very sensitive about the people’s livelihoods, the price of commodities and foreign exchange, so much so that if the price of an item went up or if a shortage was felt, the matter would be addressed at the very beginning of the sessions of government meetings which were held twice a week every week at the time, and before anything else was discussed at the meetings. Contrast this with today, when prices and the market are left completely to themselves, with literally no oversight and no control or regulation, because as we know, based on the agreement with the IMF, the government has accepted the abolition of price controls and the determination of the prices of the majority of commodities has been left to the mechanism of the market, and this is one of the important reasons for the current situation and the discontent of the public.
        
        Another important thing that was done during the war, which even wealthy countries are forced to do during times of war, was the rationing of basic necessities through coupons. The people were not just assured that they would receive these items, but they had no worries about price stability, in contrast to today where many people cannot afford meat and rice, and the ability to purchase milk and dairy and eggs and others foods is also gradually becoming more difficult.
        
        One more important action which was taken to assist low-income strata was the establishment of a retirement and disability insurance for all rural people working in the production sector who had reached 60 years of age, which also helped keep rural people in rural areas and even encouraged them to return from the cities.
        
        Another important difference between then and now is the matter of financial corruption. In the wartime conditions there was never any of the various forms of corruption such as embezzlement, abuse of funds, land grabbing, mountain grabbing, forest grabbing in any significant degree and as extensive and widespread and with such astronomical sums as today.
        
        And still another important difference pertains to the views and beliefs about living simply and modestly and shying away from luxury, which at that time was very effective in preventing national resource from being wasted.
        
        Did Iran have much exports at that time? How did the government supply the country’s expenses?
        
        Due to the wartime conditions, exports were limited. Non-state exports mostly comprised rugs, pistachio, caviar, etc, where the resulting foreign currency did not belong to the government and belonged to the exporter, and would be sold to the Central Bank, which the Central Bank would in turn offer as foreign exchange for obtaining services. The state’s Rial income from non-oil exports was negligible, and many incentives were set up to encourage and promote exports. The most important export item was oil which comprised the major items in the government’s Rial and foreign currency budget. The exports of other items such as copper and other minerals were negligible. After oil, tax income made up the largest portion of the government’s budget and the state’s expenses. The ratio of tax to oil income was variable, particularly because tankers, storage facilities, refineries and installations were constantly coming under attack and struck by missiles.
        
        Were the needs of the country obtained through domestic production or imports?
        
        Every country obtains some of its needs through domestic production and some through imports. In regards to domestic production, on top of limitations which existed in regards to obtaining basic material from abroad and the wartime conditions where production facilities were threatened, Iran was also in the primary stages of industrialization and development, and many of the items which are produced domestically today, perforce had to be imported at that time, but the import of luxury items like certain automobiles and household appliances was not permitted and the people were not keen on such items either. Some items which were dual-purpose, so to speak, and could be used in war, such as even barbed wire, would not be sold to Iran by anyone, and these limitations were a powerful incentive for attention to domestic production.
        
        In the 1980s an economic duality of government and free market arose in Iran
        
        A few points first,
        
        1. Centralized planning by the state and state ownership and the rejection of private ownership over the apparatus of production and public services which are the basic tenets of all socialist systems have been a failure in practice. Although, socialist states had thought up some arrangements to counter the results and consequences of such a system, such as lack of motivation by the workforce, low productivity and increasing cost of production and decreasing gross domestic production, such as limited exceptions to private sector activity, but this same centralized planning in the hands of the state together with state ownership, according to those involved in these systems, was the most important factor in the decline and fall of socialist systems in these countries.
        
        2. On the other hand in countries under a liberal capitalist system, the mechanism of the free market was considered sufficient on its own to create an economic balance, and the government was not permitted to implement economic policy. And the distribution of income was also left to the mechanism of the market, and the government had no responsibility towards that either; there were consequences, such as extraordinary poverty and adversity for the working classes, and an unimaginable drop in life expectancy of working class families. Based on the conditions of supply and demand in the market, workers had no choice but to work every day of the week. According to official reports in 1840 in France, the average work day, even for women and children, was 17 hours per day, and in England it was 16 hours, and wages were minimal; ie. this wage was just enough to keep a worker alive so that they could keep working (based on personal freedom in making contracts with the government having no right to interfere and no laws to determine the terms of the contract). The result of such conditions was extensive worker dissatisfaction and protests which eventually brought down the liberal capitalist system, which gave way to a system of regulated capitalism (mid 19th century). The government took on duties pertaining to the regulation of the economy, confronting recession, crises and unemployment, through implementing financial and monetary policy and laws regarding minimum wage, work hours per day, mandatory holidays, and social security.
        
        3. The result that none of these two models have been successful and the world through centuries of experience has reached the conclusion that neither the centralization of economic activity in the hands of the state and the abolition of the private sector, nor the neutrality of the government’s role and total faith in the mechanism of the market is enough to create an economic balance automatically.
        
        4. In wartime conditions, the role and interference of governments in the economy increases, because otherwise, hoarding, panic buying, extreme price hikes, famine, and disorder in economic activity behind the front lines, can determine the fate of the war. And as such, the Iranian government had a responsibility to provide basic necessities, special commodities, overseeing and controlling the market prices, etc, in the wartime conditions, which it did.
        
        What was Iranian currency worth during the war? And when did it being to lose its value?
        
        During the war, the Iranian government was very sensitive to the price of goods, the value of the Rial, and the rate of foreign exchange. As you we’ll know, one of the biggest drivers of inflation is war. In times of war, due to many reasons, such as lack of security, disorder in communication systems, damage to production capabilities, shortage of goods and hoarding, the price of goods and the rate of inflation increase eccentrically. Even so, according to official statistics, in 1985 the inflation rate in Iran during the war was only 4%. 10 years later, which was 7 years after the war, in the government of Mr. Hashemi, the inflation rate reached 50%.
        
        The foreign exchange rates also increased massively, such that the dollar which was 120 Tomans (1200 Rials) in 1989, reached nearly 800 Tomans in 1995. This was the first time when the value of Iranian currency plummeted with such speed, and the results of following the IMF’s guidelines became apparent in this form. It was here that Mr. Hashemi felt the danger, and despite his own prior opinion by using experts and specialists from outside of the Central Bank, fixed the rate of the dollar at 300 Tomans.
        
        This story is to be continued, but as I said at the beginning, Lebanon will be conducting negotiations with the IMF starting in the following days. Nasrallah and Hezbollah are aware of exactly who and what they are dealing with. And the economists of the Resistance today have a keen grasp of their field.
        
        Yesterday, Nasrallah announced his roadmap for negotiations with the IMF in order to prevent the imposition of the West’s conditions on Lebanon, which requires its own write-up and analysis which I will try to get to if amarynth doesn’t beat me to it.
        
        But a short update from the Zionist front. The Israelis have announced that they are allocating a budget of a billion or so dollars towards striking Iranian nuclear facilities. In response, Ali Shamkhani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, tweeted that the Zionists should also allocate tens of thousands of billions of dollars for reconstruction of their country afterwards.
        
        The Israelis have assassinated Iranian nuclear scientists, sabotaged nuclear facilities, and taken various other actions against Iran’s nuclear project, and they have received due responses, and nobody except themselves knows the pains which they have endured; responses which have caused them to send international mediators to beg Iran to stop the process of punishments.
        
        In any case, now they have stated that they are allocating 1.5 billion dollars to strike Iranian nuclear installations. And Iran has responded on the highest level, that if Israel does such a thing, Iran will turn all of the Zionist pseudo-state into ashes and rubble.
        
        Who thinks Israel is bluffing? And who thinks Iran is bluffing? Place your bets, ladies and gents!
        
        And on another note, there has been some developments between Iran and Armenia, and some agreements have been made.
        
        Yahya Saree has announced that Yemeni troops are now on the hills overlooking the city of Marib. He has warned all civilians in the area to move away from military sites.
        
        https://newsmedia.tasnimnews.com/Tasnim/Uploaded/Image/1400/08/02/1400080219191745123893424.jpg — And last but not least, an Israeli ship caught fire off the Canadian coast yesterday.
        
        After hours of silence, Israeli media eventually broke the news of fire aboard the Zim. According to their reports, at least 40 containers have fallen overboard. Fire fighting ships arrived on the scene to combat the blaze.
        
        It goes without saying who the culprit is here. And the message of this attack is also clear: nowhere is safe.
- ANTONIO SEVERO NOCETTI on October 19, 2021 · at 10:48 am EST/EDT
  
  Anônimo: Deus dos justos faça suas previsões realidade
John Mason on October 18, 2021 · at 11:19 pm EST/EDT

Hezbollah could start a war with israel and that would force Lebanon into the conflict thus bypassing israel’s/US attempt at creating a civil war. It would also involve Syria with the option of regaining Golan Heights and Iran who would have justification of destroying israel and getting rid of the US bases inSyria and Iraq.
- Dr. NG Maroudas on October 19, 2021 · at 2:44 am EST/EDT
  
  @John Mason: “getting rid of the US bases in Syria and Iraq”.
  
  Iran and Hezb have been doing that for decades; helped by Russia since 2013, and now China. Cutting off the tentactles one by one. Same with Iran, Russia and China in Afghanistan. It’s been a long game but the endgame is in play.
  
  As a European and a Francophile I hope Europe may recover from its self-imposed decline, but those who recommend Lebanon to look Eastward seem to be right.