Home | About | Donate

Zarif: Trump Only Makes 'More Explicit' Long-Held US Desire for 'Regime Change' in Iran


#1

Zarif: Trump Only Makes 'More Explicit' Long-Held US Desire for 'Regime Change' in Iran

Jon Queally, staff writer

As President Trump threatens to rip up the nuclear agreement between the U.S., Iran and other major powers, the Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javar Zarif said on Sunday that the United States has "never abandoned the idea of regime change" for his country and the only major difference now is that the Trump administration has just become "more explicit about stating it."

"Well, I think the United States has never abandoned the idea of regime change in Iran. Now they are more explicit about stating it." —Iran Foreign Minister Mohammad Javar Zarif


#2

I guess this illustrates PLAINLY who the REAL leaders are and who would rather have peace than weapons profits over people!


#3

It’s so embarrassing to be a citizen of the US. One foreign leader after another, whether Putin or Zarif, by stating basic elementary facts and recent historical events, shows up our “leaders” to be war mongering liars. And no, not just since the ascendancy of Trump.


#4

Let’s follow the money for a moment: Western oil corporations have for years heavily invested in the gas-and oil-rich fields of the Caspian Sea and are eager to see their returns. Iran and Russia both border the Caspian Sea with Iran rightfully claiming a percentage of the exploits, Therefore, the US indeed has a long-held desire for regime change in Iran…


#5

Talk about fake news! Yes, the US FASCISTS could really care less about Iran’s nukes, but what they really care about is Iranian regime change and installing a puppet in order to exploit Iranian resources!


#6

Attacking the Iran deal is not in the service of the American people . It’s in the service of politicians themselves, their financial backers, Israel, the industrial -military complex, and lastly Saudi Arabia - such perfidy all covered-up by lies, and more lies. Outside of special interests, the American people are not represented:- the people’s interests don’t count much at all for those attacking the Iran deal.

So much for our great democracy. Our leaders are supposed to represent the people (with truth and justice).


#7

Not to mention the fact, that the first covert operation of the CIA, in conjunction with the Brits and cooperating Iranians, overthrew the Democratically elected Mohammad Mossadegh because he wanted to nationalize the oil industry in Iran and throw out US and British interests including the company that became BP.

Supposedly, of course, it was about Communism according to US and British propaganda.

So this would be Regime Change 2.0 in regard to Iran.


#8

Zarif is correct about long standing desire of Neocons and others to reverse the Iranian Revolution (that came about in response to the US and Britain having installed the Shah after overthrowing Mohammad Mossadegh).

The point is however, not that Trump and Bolton are just being more “honest” about it, but rather are much more likely to actually do it.

And no, it’s not because the Deep State is dragging Trump around by his ear, ad nauseum.


#9

The geographical importance of Iran as far as the Western Empire is concerned is also material and just as important as it sitting on all of that oil. Turkey and Iran are key to flanking Russia from the south which would allow Military force projection into Central Asia.

Recently the EU member nations signed an article condemning China building its “silk road project” across Central Asia as they claimed it would give China an unacceptable competitive advantage. Iran is to be a linchpin in that project. Iran borders all of the “Stans” in the underbelly of Eurasia and China along with Russia in promoting the Silk Road project will gain significant influence in that region.

Military force projection is about controlling resources AND access to the same and these resources include everything from Oil and Natural gas to Copper and Iron ore. One reason why North Korea has a right to fear the US military is it has an abundance of metals and other resources as yet unexploited. One reason why China and Russia both seem to side with North Korea is they know full well that if the North Korean regime falls, US troops will be close behind to occupy that nation bringing them right to the borders of Russia and China in that region as well.

History has shown that once the US sends in troops into a country they become an all but permanent presence and infrastructure projects to support the same soon follow. This followup of Military spending then ties the Nation in which it occurs to the Western Empire as a revenue stream.


#10

The USA, UK, France & Israel are in the greatest needs for regime change.In 2020, there may be a different POTUS but domestic & foreign policy will probably be the same as it is now.


#11

This has been the legacy of the US, if a government doesn’t kow tow to us, then we change the government and install a dictator who will give the US what they wanted.

I have counted over 35 times we have installed a dictator and I am sure that I have missed some. Iran is just one of the countries we have done that to.

The hypocrisy of how we love freedom and democracy while installing dictators is appalling. And yet we complain about dictators who are not our friends claiming they should allow free elections. While refusing to demand freedom for those who are our allies.

And the hypocrisy of calling Iran a terrorist country while our good friend the Saudi spend far more money and encourage terrorism with their fanatical religious teachings is also evidence that the call for freedom and democracy and the war on terror is justBS on the US’s part.


#12

Fact is that the U.S., Israel, and Saudi Arabia are the current preeminent terrorist governments of this earth.


#13

Recently the EU member nations signed an article condemning China building its “silk road project” across Central Asia as they claimed it would give China an unacceptable competitive advantage.

Could you give me a reference on this? I’m kind of surprised by the last clause about unacceptable competitive advantage. What would that mean?


#14

The point needs to be made that Middle East countries have a different way of aligning their politics that is different generally than what we do in the West, in America. The politics align with the religions. You have Sunni Muslims, and then you have Shia Muslims. What Trump seems to not understand is his wish for regime change can be translated into an Iranian attitude that Trump favors. Trump as an infidel has no credibility to criticize Iran. A regime change would not necessarily be about only a regime change.


#15

They claim Chinese Compnaies will reap most of the benefits.


#16

Yep. Make peace, not war.


#17

Thank you , Jon, for highlighting that Iraq was given chemical weapons by the US. Now, following up, Saddam distanced itself from the US, destroyed its chemical weapons, and then the US invaded them on the pretext of Iraq still having them.


#18

Peace across Asia, wonderful dream. May it come true.


#19

A decent treatment of the conflict in terms of Shiite vs Sunni linked below. Trump is simply backing Israel and the Saudi’s, who want to control the power of tye Shiite crescent in the region.

And Zarif can make all the claims he wants, but Iran would be crazy not to pursue nuclear weapons. The sad reality is that nukes really level the playing field…


#20

GW Bush lied about having WMD’s. If they really had them, he wouldn’t invade because they would use them against the Coalition Forces. Hussein said the UN Weapons Inspectors could return but that wasn’t good enough for W. He declared war on Iraq anyway & said the Coalition Forces would be the weapons inspectors.