The Costs of America's Obsessive and Paralyzing Irano-phobia
Graham E. Fuller
11 August 2024
It is stunning to consider that the United States is now approaching the half century mark of refusal to deal with the reality of Iran in the Middle East. Washington never forgets a humiliation. Now, well on into the next generation, American foreign policy practitioners remain
paralyzed by the humiliating blow delivered to America, the great superpower, by a ragtag bunch of Islamist students in Tehran who in 1979 occupied and held fifty two American diplomats as hostages over 444 days. The student action of course was in reaction to decades of long unwavering American support to what was widely perceived as an oppressive and harsh autocratic regime by America's "best friend in the Middle East, " the Shah of Iran.
Yet these American obsessions and psychological hangups have cost the US ever more dearly with each passing decade in the Middle East. Iran is arguably the most important geopolitical power in the Middle East in influence while Israel still enjoys military dominance.
And the second most important geopolitical power in the Middle East is Turkey – a country with whom the United States is frequently at odds even within a NATO structure due to Ankara' stubbornly independent foreign policy stance that dares to see its own geopolitical sphere as stretching north, south, east, and west from Ankara
It is actually extraordinary that Iran and Turkey--the two major non-Arab states in the region-- are the two who are also lending the most full throated diplomatic, and possibly even logistical and military support to the Palestinian cause in the Middle East. Does this not perhaps tell us something about the longer range "correlation of forces" in the region? No Arab state except for the gutsy and dirt poor country of Yemen has offered meaningful military support like Yemen's blockade of shipping to Israel via the Red Sea. No Arab ruler has even dared to brave Washington's wrath by breaking diplomatic relations with Israel, even as the genocide in Gaza continues.
How could this be, given the fact that Palestine is the preeminent popular Arab political cause in the region?
One answer is simple. Arab kings and potentates hate and fear the Palestinian cause because it represents rare regional spontaneous mass public action and resistance outside of the control of Arab rulers. The Palestinian resistance offers psychological support to other potential popular and mass movements among Arab populations that sooner or later will turn against their own bloated and rich autocrats, all of whom are incidentally embraced by Washington and even Israel.
If we are to untangle the inept mess of our American foreign policy "leaders" we might do well to consider why we are still, still leaving Iran outside the realm of consideration for a diplomatic rapprochement and renewed relationship.
It is clear how distasteful such a step might be to tired and unimaginative American policy makers in clinging to
half a century of refusing to deal with Iran. Yet
if these same leaders had any geopolitical wits about them they might consider the benefits of reversing course to come to terms with Iran rather than consistently and unanimously demonizing it daily across American media and Congress.
One wonders whether Blinken and company have noticed the steady moves of Russia and China towards Iran through the vehicle of the important BRICS movement – the combined efforts of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa--that are in the process of changing the shape of global geopolitics. This is an especially significant grouping as other significant powers also seek to join the BRICS such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Argentina, and several African states.
Iran has been at the forefront of recent Russian and Chinese diplomatic, economic, strategic, and even military rapprochement. Russia and China among others clearly grasp the hugely important geostrategic political position of Iran at the cusp of the Middle East, Central Asia, and the oil routes of the Middle East. Has Washington been blind to this?
Apparently Blinken and company are willing to cede major political influence over Iran to Russia, and China out of sheer detestation of that country. Since Iran is well on the way towards developing a nuclear military capability, you would think that closer dealings with Tehran would be of great importance. Instead, Washington falls back upon its knee-jerk default "strategy" of excluding, threatening, sanctioning, and demonizing countries it does not like.
Unlike Russia and China which seem less intent than Washington upon identifying enemies around the world, Washington has found the demonization of Iran to be a useful tool to scare small rich Gulf rulers into anti-Iranian postures. But this American game plan was the. dealt a deadly blow in 2023 by Beijing's creative and significant mediation between "eternal enemies" of arch Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran along with some other Gulf states who are now dealing with each other despite Washington displeasure
Yet in many respects, Iran holds important keys to the prospects of expanded war or peace in the Middle East. Its allies in Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen – always referred to as Iranian "proxies" in Washington- speak (never mind our own "proxies" across the region) have much regional clout.
Actually there are only two inherent reasons for maintaining Washington's self-defeating hostility towards Iran. One, as I already mentioned, goes back to the humiliation of the Iranian hostage crisis half century ago. But another probably more important driver is the Israeli factor. Israel fears Iran more than any other state in the Middle East – for all its importance as an ideological and military power. (Interestingly, although many Arabs dislike the non-Arab Persians, nearly all of them admire Iran's guts as a revolutionary power of resistance against the West.) Israel has long identified Iran as its key enemy of choice – and it has many potential enemies to choose from. The major reason is that only Iran threatens total Israeli hegemony across the Middle East – the top Zionist geopolitical goal. Israel is now working overtime to bring about a military crisis with Iran designed to draw Washington into the fray with Israel against Iran. And we all know, of course of the extraordinary power of the American Zionist lobby that owns the US Congress and that stokes the deepest roots of American Iranophobia.
To preempt Russian and Chinese influence in Iran is, of course, the lazy men's geopolitical touchstone. American policy is largely dominated by such negative and unconstructive impulses of doing anything and everything to block China and Russia. One would hope that a more creative and constructive rationale for dealing with Iran and the world might exist other than simply trying to deny it to Russia, China, and to stymie the growing geopolitical movement across the rising Global South. But that seems to be the only arrow in the American geopolitical quiver. And that is what is gradually leading American foreign policy and influence into perdition.
Iran would surely value the opportunity to deal with both China and Russia on the one hand and "the West "on the other. We cannot expect Tehran to eagerly drop its ties with Russia and China in favour of Washington. Like so many other countries it perceives the future as lying more in the "east" than in the "west."But an opening to Tehran would be a start.Washington has had a hand in impoverishing and crushing Iran over half century of sanctions that have failed even to prevent Iran from becoming a significant source (along with Turkey) of military materiel employed now in both Ukraine and Palestine conflicts. By turning our back to Iran, are we not condemning ourselves to competing in the region with one hand behind our back?
Might it not now be perhaps time to reconsider unfreezing this mindless, endless refusal to deal with Iran? To perhaps begin to try to influence its policies with a few carrots? To offer America a few more regional strategic options? American-Iranian hostility does not have to be written in stone. After all, China stunningly brought about an "unreconcileable" mediation between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
It would be unfortunate for America if China now has a monopoly on leading the way to way more peaceful world in its efforts at reconciliation in many global conflicts. Those efforts are broadly worthwhile for the world as a wholein trying to limit conflict. Is Washington incapable of matching China in creative game-changing diplomacy other than through weaponry?
============================
Graham E. Fuller is a former CIA operations officer for over two decades in the Middle East and Asia and former Vice Chair of the National Intelligence Council at CIA for long-range forecasting.