Analyst told MNA;
In the wake of Donald Trump’s latest remarks claiming that the United States is “locked and loaded and ready to go” to “rescue” Iranian protesters, Washington’s familiar interventionist rhetoric toward Iran has once again moved to the center of international attention. These statements come at a time when U.S. sanctions are widely recognized as a major driver of economic hardship for ordinary Iranians, exposing a clear contradiction between professed support for the Iranian people and the continued enforcement of policies that directly undermine their livelihoods.
In order to shed more light on the issue, Mehr News Agency conducted an interview with Pakistani analyst Javed Rana. The interview goes beyond headline-grabbing threats to examine the substance behind Trump’s warnings and promises. It explores whether his rhetoric reflects genuine concern for human rights or merely represents a continuation of pressure-based strategies—sanctions, coercion, and military posturing—that have defined U.S. policy toward Iran for years, while also assessing the credibility and consequences of renewed threats against Iran’s nuclear and missile programs.
Here is the full text of the interview;
Donald Trump has claimed today that his coutry is ready to rescue Iranian protertors. Given that U.S. sanctions are widely recognized as a primary driver of economic hardship and livelihood pressures on ordinary Iranians, why does Donald Trump—while claiming to support Iranian protesters—show no willingness to ease sanctions that directly affect civilians, and instead prioritize threats, coercion, and military force as his main tools?
I think Donald Trump's saying that he's willing to give some kind of support to the Iranian protesters, it doesn't make sense. The USA and the West has always tried to exploit the situation whenever there have been internal problems inside Iran. But, going by the track record, I don't think any protest movement inside Iran could turn into any bigger uprising against the Iranian government.
That is the most unlikely to happen. There was similar situations in the past and then the West tried to support these protesters, and they failed terribly. And I don't foresee any different situation once again if that kind of support Donald Trump tries to give. Remember, Donald Trump and other Western leaders, over a period of time, have systematically introduced institutionalized hypocrisy.
If there is a economic problem, which is very, there are genuine economic problems inside Iran, and the biggest leading reason is the sanctions by the Americans, sanctions by the other Western countries. So if they have some love for the Iranians, why don't they lift those sanctions? The problem with the USA and the West is that they have not been able to understand that the Iranians are not willing to compromise their core geostrategic national interest, and they are not compromising, and they've been supporting the Palestinians.
I think that is the price they've been paying. And I don't think Donald Trump in any manner would be able to do anything. His threats to Iran should not be taken very seriously.
To what extent should Trump’s recent statements threatening intervention during protests in Iran be understood as genuine concern for human rights, rather than as a continuation of pressure tactics aimed at destabilization?
Donald Trump is a kind of a person who's not taken seriously inside in the USA. He's a being perceived as an a puppet of Israel and the Zionist lobby. And at the same time, he also knows that the Zionist lobby is causing a lot of troubles for him. So in order to essentially satisfy and calm down this Zionist lobby, he's making these kind of political rhetoric, which should not be taken seriously.
I don't think Donald Trump is going to extend any help to the Iranian protesters. These are just statements and nothing else.
During his presser with the Israeli regime's prime minister late in December, Trump also threatened to target Iran's missile and nuclear program. Has Donald Trump achieved any concrete or verifiable strategic success through his past policy of “maximum pressure” and military threats against Iran that would justify his renewed warnings of a rapid attack? If such achievements exist, why did Israel later call for a ceasefire?
I think Donald Trump's threats to target Iran's nuclear programor its missile program are hollow rhetoric. These are hollow threats.
Essentially, behind the scenes, he's fed up with Netanyahu, but given the fact that the Zionist lobby is very strong, he doesn't want to displease them. And that is why for the public consumption, he has to make a lot of nonsensical statements. The latest threat to Iran is just part of that nonsensical political drama that he always creates.
I think the maximum pressure, both USA and apartheid Israel regime try to apply through a war last year, failed terribly. And I think Iran has proven one point that it has capability and capacity, more particularly its missile technology and its missile program. Iran proved that it can beat up Israel in a very effective manner.
I think it was because of the Iranian missiles attacks during last war which forced Donald Trump and Netanyahu to go for some kind of a ceasefire agreement.
How do you assess the possibity of renewed war between Iran and the Israeli regime and the United States?
My understanding is that the Donald Trump would not attack Iran in any manner, in any time in future.
So I think Iran is far more organized when it comes to its missile program and its military. It has further reorganized itself. And that is something which Israel knows, and this is most unlikely, that Israel once again would undertake that kind of misadventure. And the Americans are unlikely to support Israel, therefore I don't think this will go beyond these political rhetorics.
Interviewed by Mohaddeseh Pakravan
No comments:
Post a Comment