Voices from Russia

Saturday, 6 January 2018

Iran “Ground Zero” for US Régime-Change


At least in part, there seems little doubt that the surge in New Year protests across Iran followed a régime-change agenda set by the USA. Public statements issued by US President Donald Trump and his senior officials all made strident calls in support of protesters while denigrating the Iranian government as a “brutal oppressor”. Arguably, that amounts to audacious incitement of sedition in a foreign state, and we should legally sanction such American misconduct. Washington and its allies used such a formula in dozens of countries over the decades, including most recently in Syria, during the 2011 unrest that led to all-out war. What’s acutely resonant is the historical background. Iran was probably the first nation subjected to American régime-change operations in the post-WWII period, with a CIA-led coup carried out in 1953.

Firstly, let’s look at the flagrant attempts by the USA to destabilise the Iranian government through highly pejorative and misleading public statements. Last week, American Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley even claimed:

The Iranian people are crying out for freedom against their dictators.

A senior official in the US State Department also admitted that his government was communicating via social media with demonstrators in Iran. Washington’s top diplomat, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, openly said in a media interview this weekend that his government is seeking “political transition” in Iran… or, in other words, régime-change. In addition, this weekend, the USA called an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council in an attempt to censure the Iranian government for the dozens of deaths incurred during the week-long protests. Haley declared:

The world is watching what Iran does.

Iran, Russia, and China berated the USA for violating Iranian sovereignty by interfering in the country’s internal affairs. The brazen attempt by the USA to fuel protests in Iran is indeed a serious breach of the UN Charter forbidding interference in any nation’s political matters. US régime-change policy is arguably criminal conduct. We still don’t know just how actively involved on the ground US agencies were in stoking the recent protests in Iran. The initial demonstrations that first broke out on 28 December in Mashhad quickly spread to dozens of other urban centres. Iranian authorities blamed the USA and other foreign enemies for being behind the disturbances.

The rallies had a legitimate part motivated by genuine economic grievances. However, at the same time, the rapid escalation of violence and armed attacks on police stations suggest that someone was orchestrating a subversive plot. The role of the US news media (and to lesser extent European) in covering the Iranian unrest was also indicative of a geopolitical agenda. In particular, the American media tended to portray the protests in a benign light as an uprising against an autocratic regime. US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley dismissed Iranian claims of foreign subversion. Haley’s dismissal contradicts the public statements and admissions of the US President and other senior officials. Nonetheless, Iran has sound reason to suspect a pernicious agenda seeking to exploit social protests.

In 2013, some 60 years after the 1953 coup in Iran, the CIA disclosed classified documents that prove the agency was behind that infamous event. The CIA worked covertly with its British counterpart MI6 to carry out Operation Ajax to overthrow the elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. Mosaddegh intended to nationalise Iran’s oil industry, threatening American and British interests. The coup ushered in the rule of the pro-Western Shah Pahlavi who opened up Iranian oil fields to American and British companies. The CIA and US military were lynchpins in the Shah’s régime and its brutal repression of Iranians until the Islamic Revolution of 1979 finally overthrew him. For this reason, Washington never forgave the Iranian people. It explains why obsession with régime-change in Tehran haunts the US political establishment.

What’s telling are the similarities between events then and now. The CIA-led coup in 1953 involved a propaganda campaign using news media outlets to undermine the government. The New York Times labelled Mosaddegh a “dictator” and compared him to “Hitler” and “Stalin”. Britain’s state broadcaster, the BBC, was also involved in the campaign to undermine the Iranian authorities, as Mark Curtis recounts in his book Web of Deceit. Back in Washington and London, the political leaders implemented an economic embargo on Tehran and denounced it as a Soviet stooge. When the coup got underway, the CIA is now on record admitting that it paid thugs and provocateurs to launch street violence in Tehran, which it blamed on the authorities ostensibly showing a heavy-hand. From the CIA and MI6’s point of view, the coup was a stunning success. The régime-change opened up big oil interests. For the Iranian people, it meant years of vicious repression under the Shah and his CIA-trained SAVAK secret police.

In 1953, the CIA was only newly-formed in the aftermath of the World War II. What the Iran coup marked was a fateful turning point for the agency, and the nature of American governments ever since, with global repercussions. In its original formation, the CIA was only intended to serve as an “intelligence gathering” service to aid US presidents to formulate foreign policy. What the coup in Iran marked was the beginning of a “secret government” within the USA; one that was above the law and unaccountable. US presidents would come and go in elections, but the “deep state” of the CIA would remain. It assumed the powers to carry out régime-change against any foreign government regardless of international law. Subversion and political assassination would become tools of this new US statecraft. Once the CIA got the habit of régime-change in Iran, it couldn’t stop. Since 1953, the American “secret government” has gone on to conduct dozens of such dirty operations around the world with deadly and horrific consequences for masses of people.

While the recent social protests in Iran have subsided, nevertheless, there also seems to be another, more sinister dimension to the Iranian disturbances… an illegal agenda of régime-change promoted by Washington. Given that Iran is “Ground Zero” for America’s historical worldwide practice of régime-change, the threat to national security from foreign interference is an understandable concern. Russia and China took the correct position in warning the USA to cease adding instability in Iran. The Iranian people must be free from external meddling to resolve their own internal problems. The laughable irony is that as American politicians and media complain hysterically about others meddling in their country, they have no qualms about brazenly poking into Iran.

6 January 2018

Finian Cunningham

Sputnik International



Monday, 8 May 2017

Iran Would Destroy the KSA If Riyadh Does Anything “Ignorant”


Following the Saudi Deputy Crown Prince’s comments about moving the battle to Iran, Defence Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan said if the Saudis do anything stupid, the Iranian forces would hit back and destroy the entire kingdom… apart from Mecca and Medina. On Sunday, Dehqan gave the warning in an interview broadcast on Arabic-language al-Manar TV in response to remarks made by Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who said any battle between Riyadh and Tehran would take place on Iranian soil. Prince Mohammed said:

We’d work to have the battle in Iran rather than in Saudi Arabia.

Dehqan said:

We warn them against doing anything ignorant, but if they do something ignorant, we’d leave nowhere untouched apart from Mecca and Medina.

He referred to the Saudi bombing campaign in Yemen… in which over 12,000 people have died… and said the Saudis think they can do anything because they have an air force.

On Tuesday, Mohammed bin Salman, who is also the KSA’s Defence Minister, ruled out ties with Iran after Tehran announced the possibility of de-escalation of tensions if Riyadh halts its war against Yemen. He emphasised that talks with Iran were impossible, as Tehran’s goal was to “control the Muslim world”. The prince made the remarks after Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the Islamic Republic was ready to normalise ties with Riyadh if the KSA halted its bombardment of Yemen and stopped supporting extremist groups.

Meanwhile, on Saturday, an Iranian Armed Forces spokesman dismissed the recent Saudi Deputy Crown Prince’s remarks, noting that Riyadh is implementing hostile policies fomented by the USA and Israel in the region. On Wednesday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi said that Prince Mohammed’s remarks prove that the KSA follows “confrontational and destructive policies” in the region and towards Tehran. The KSA has incessantly pounded Yemen since March 2015 in an attempt to bring back to power the resigned president, Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, a staunch ally of Riyadh, and to undermine the Ansarullah movement. However, the Riyadh régime failed to reach its goals despite great expense on its part.

8 May 2017

Pars Today


Monday, 20 February 2017

Washington Wants Coalition of Sunni Régimes to Fight Iran

00 Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Iranian counterpart Ali Akbar Salehi. 06.12

Minister of Foreign Affairs S V Lavrov and his Iranian counterpart Ali Akbar Salehi in 2012


The Saudis can’t even defeat the poorly-equipped Houthis in Yemen… good luck fighting a well-trained well-armed Moscow-backed military. We know it’s a badly abused cliché, but we really did laugh out loud after reading that Washington is “working to create a military alliance of Sunni Arab nations” to “counter” Iran. Close your eyes and imagine NATO. Are you seeing visions of an incompetent useless dinosaur that can’t tell the difference between a wedding party and a terrorist pow-wow? Now, clear your mind and imagine a NATO-like coalition with Egypt, Jordan, the KSA, and the UAE as members. Imagine that this coalition of medieval failures had one mission and one mission only… to provoke a war with Iran.

Typical. Washington finally realised that Americans have zero interest in starting a war with Iran, despite years of tireless propaganda portraying Tehran as an existential threat to humanity… or Israel, but what’s the difference, right? They’ve tried everything… even lobbing accusations that one can easily debunk with a simple Google search. Hey, wait a minute… maybe, our medieval Sunni allies would fight Iran for us? That’d be swell. Isn’t that what friends are for? This is true desperation seeping out of Washington’s adult diapers.

Iran isn’t Syria. It doesn’t have to worry about appeasing 1,000 different ethnic and religious groups. It’s a proud country with a long history of fighting off foreign parasites. A Sunni war against Iran would’ve likely been a disaster even ten years ago. Today? It’d be suicidal. Russia is Tehran’s dependable political and military ally, and the idea that Washington would somehow drive a wedge between Moscow and Tehran is ludicrous. Russia would do everything it could to help Iran fight off Sunni fanatics, for the same reason it intervened in Syria… if Washington’s “moderates” were to overrun the Middle East, Russia would be next.

Forget the fact that Iran already deploys Russian-made S-300 SAMs, or that Russia and Iran coördinated a miraculous military campaign to turn the tables in Syria in less than a year… an experience that’d be invaluable if there were a Sunni-led war against Iran. Just for a moment, consider that Russia has gone so far as to ask Washington to acknowledge Hizbullah as a crucial part of anti-ISIS efforts in Syria. Hizbullah! The very name sends shivers up the crooked spines of every Israel First blowhard with an American passport.

People worry that Moscow would abandon Tehran? For Russia, Iran is a holy grail of business opportunities and security coöperation. There’s one takeaway from Syria… Washington loves to stir up trouble in countries that can’t defend themselves. However, when a formidable force such as Russia steps into the ring, the Americans run for the hills (crying foul, of course). Even with full support from Washington and Israel (Israel would stay in the shadows, to keep up appearances), the KSA, Qatar, and the UAE would get a Russian-backed Persian beating that they’d never forget. The icing on the cake would be that this “anti-Iran” bloc includes some of the most autocratic states on earth… anti-women, anti-democratic, anti-everything… it’d be a true joy to watch Washington claim that the KSA and Qatar were fighting Iran to protect democracy in the Middle East.

Of course, we’re probably getting ahead of ourselves. Following NATO’s model, this coalition of medieval head-choppers would first surround Iran with defensive military bases. Then, the provocations and (more) sanctions would begin. It won’t work. Iran isn’t Iraq. It isn’t Libya. It isn’t Syria. It already has the full backing of Russia. If Washington were smart, it’d take note.

18 February 2017

Rudy Panko

Russian Insider


Tuesday, 7 February 2017

7 February 2017. A Point to Ponder… A True Read n’ Heed

00 same ol' shit. 29.05.12


The mainstream pro-imperialist left and the demagogic racist alt-right are effectively playing off each other. The alt-right screams hatred for Muslims, describing the actions of Saudi Arabia and al-Qaeda. The left screams, “You’re not allowed to say that! Racist!” and supports the “Syrian Revolution” and other CIA régime-change operations. No one points up that the USA props up Saudi Arabia, funding and arming Wahhabi groups, whilst targeting independent states like Syria, Iran, and Libya. Yes, there is backwardness in the Middle East, but the west has maintained it and targeted the forces of modernism and independence. The Alt-Right and the Soros Pro-Imperialist Cultural Left are like a duet, with both sides singing their chorus of lies, drowning out the truth. One side wants covert funding of Wahhabi extremists in the name of human rights and pushes “understanding” of disgusting autocratic US-aligned régimes like Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The other side wants violent attacks on Islamic countries, repression of immigrants, and support for Israel. I want neither. I want people in the Middle East to have the freedom to develop their own countries without foreign meddling. Self-determination.

6 February 2017

Caleb Maupin


Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.