israeli-US script: Divide Syria, divide the rest

 

US President Barack Obama

What is happening in Syria is a sign of things to come for the region. Regime change is not the sole goal of the US and its allies in Syria. Dividing the Syrian Arab Republic is the end goal of Washington in Syria.

Britain’s Maplecroft, which specializes in consulting on strategic risk, has said that we are witnessing the balkanization of the Syrian state: “Kurds in the north, Druze in the southern hills, Alawites in the coastal northwestern mountainous region and the Sunni majority elsewhere.”

We are already hearing people like White House advisors Vali Nasr talking about all this. The religious and ethnic cleavages in Syria are not demarcated in purely geographic terms and the balkanization process could play out as a lebonization process, which means that Syria will be divided along violent sectarian fault lines and face political deadlock like Lebanon during its civil war without formally breaking up. Lebonization, a soft form of balkanization, has already taken place in Iraq under federalism.  Continue reading

Saudi Arabia cannot replace Iran’s oil supply: Iran oil minister

Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi speaks during an interview with Press TV on April 16, 2012.

Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi says Saudi Arabia cannot replace Iran’s oil supply to the global market in the long run, Press TV reports.

Qasemi made the remarks during an interview with Press TV’s News Analysis on Monday night.

He noted that although the Saudi side stated at the most recent OPEC meeting that Saudi Arabia was not seeking to take Iran’s share of the oil market, “the latest policy of Saudi Arabia turned out otherwise” as Riyadh announced that it was ready to compensate for a lack of Iranian oil in the market.

The Iranian oil minister said, “Saudi production may be temporary, and it definitely cannot continue.”

“It is not practical, and if it is practical, it is transient… and will have negative effects in the future,” he added.  Continue reading

Petrodollar pumping US policy on Iran, backfire looms

An oil field near Pol-e-Dokhtar, Iran

As tensions between the US and Iran heat up, author Michael T. Winter believes the main reason behind America’s harsh stance is Tehran’s move to seek an alternative to the dollar as an oil currency.

Economic sanctions, spearheaded by the US and, less willingly, the EU could have a disastrous effect on both of their respective economies.  If Iran cannot sell their oil to Europe, there are plenty of customers waiting in the wings, and if they come bearing not petrodollars, but gold and sovereign currencies, then all the better for Iran.  These sanctions, if enforced, will in effect place a serious dent in the power of the petrodollar.

Any rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear program and the insistence on crippling it is nothing more than a US attempt to force regime change for one more receptive to maintaining the hegemony of the petrodollar.

The world now knows the truth about the US and how they conduct their affairs.  US hostilities toward Iran have nothing to do with nuclear weapons development.  If that were the case, then North Korea and Pakistan would be facing similar sanctions and threats, but they aren’t. The difference of course is in what lies beneath the ground – oil. Iran has it and the other guys don’t.

At the heart of the issue is not Iran’s dubious attempt to build nuclear weapons, or even oil, but how that oil is paid for.  In 1973, Richard Nixon promised King Faisal of Saudi Arabia that the US would protect Saudi Arabian oilfields from any and all interested parties seeking to forcefully wrest them from the House of Saud.  It’s important to remember that in 1973, Saudi Arabia didn’t have a fraction of the military and ground forces it possesses today (almost exclusively US manufactured weapons) and the USSR was very much a threat. Continue reading