Vol. 79/No. 14      April 20, 2015

The tentative deal faces a firestorm of opposition, including from Israel, Saudi Arabia and other governments in the Middle East, Republicans and some Democrats in Congress.

It registers further unraveling of the imperialist order that has dominated in the Mideast for decades. The result is increasing instability and war, which will continue and deepen regardless of whether the agreement with Tehran goes ahead, until a working-class leadership capable of charting a way forward in the interests of the toilers is forged.

The talks did not end in a signed agreement, but rather with a list of “parameters” for an accord to be negotiated over the next three months. According to a White House press release, these include Iran’s agreement to reduce the number of uranium enrichment centrifuges from 19,000 to 6,104 for the next 10 years; to not enrich uranium beyond the level used to generate nuclear energy for 15 years; and to reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium. This is supposed to increase the time it would take Tehran to produce the material for a nuclear bomb to one year, from Washington’s current estimate of two or three months.

In addition, Iran’s underground Fordow nuclear production facility would be converted to a research and development center, and the Arak reactor would be rebuilt to preclude production of weapons-grade plutonium.

The imperialist-imposed sanctions that have increasingly strangled Iran’s economy over the last decade, with devastating effects on workers and farmers there, remain in place while the talks continue. U.S., U.N. and European Union nuclear-related sanctions — which have crippled everything from oil exports and auto production to food imports — would be suspended once the International Atomic Energy Agency certifies that Tehran has taken the steps agreed to. They would “snap back into place” if Tehran did not comply.

And “U.S. sanctions on Iran for terrorism, human rights abuses, and ballistic missiles will remain in place,” according to the White House statement.

‘Obama doctrine’ riles allies
Since his 2008 election, Obama has sought to reduce Washington’s military “footprint” around the world and cut back on arms spending. He looks to replace them with “diplomatic and moral persuasion,” the Wall Street Journal said last year, seeking “resets” with Moscow, Syria and Iran.

New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman interviewed Obama April 4, asking him if there is “an Obama Doctrine,” marked by the belief that “engagement is possible.”

Obama made it clear that if things go sour, he is prepared to strike out, saying “engagement” must be combined with “a sense that we are powerful enough to test these propositions without putting ourselves at risk.”

His course with Iran has been consistent with his belief that he can bring peace to the world by finding other “intelligent” leaders to have a dialogue with. This view is shared by like-minded academics, staffers of nongovernmental organizations and similar meritocratic social layers in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere, including those who awarded Obama the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009.

This stands in stark contrast to social relations in a world where a crisis of capitalist trade and production is intensifying economic rivalries, political instability and social crises across the globe.

The sharp objections to negotiations with Iran by longtime U.S. allies in the region and in Congress are more than partisan bickering. The governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia are not only concerned about the possibility of Tehran developing a nuclear weapon but also the expanding economic, political and military role of Iran in the region, including its backing of Shiite-based militias in a number of countries.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the agreement could “threaten the survival of Israel.” In an April 3 speech he cited an Iranian paramilitary leader as saying, “The destruction of Israel is non-negotiable.” Tehran is “accelerating the arming of its terror proxies to attack Israel,” said Netanyahu.

The rulers of Saudi Arabia also fear expansion of Tehran’s reach. Riyadh helped organize a meeting in Egypt March 26 where Arab League leaders initiated a regional rapid-response military force.

The Saudi monarchy is pressing its war against Iranian-backed Houthi forces that recently toppled the pro-U.S. government in Yemen. A dairy factory where 39 workers were killed April 1 was one of the targets of the Saudi-led bombardment, as well as other factories, medical facilities and a refugee camp. In addition to the airstrikes, which are backed by Egypt, Turkey and most of the Sunni Gulf state monarchies, there have been ground skirmishes on the border between Saudi troops and Tehran-backed rebel forces.

The Houthi militias, which are allied with military units loyal to Yemen’s former dictator, Ali Abdullah Saleh, have taken control of parts of the port city of Aden, not far from the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait, a major shipping channel. Washington has assisted the Saudi assault with intelligence information, but is not involved in the air assaults.

Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which operates in central Yemen, has taken the opportunity to expand the area it controls.

Meanwhile, Iraqi government forces and Iranian-backed Shiite militias claimed victory April 1 over the Islamic State in the city of Tikrit. Washington has been in a tacit alliance with Tehran in fighting Islamic State in Iraq. As has happened in other predominantly Sunni areas, the capture of Tikrit has been accompanied by looting and burning of homes and attacks against residents by Shiite militia forces.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home