How Russian And Iran Beat Their Opponents' Strategies

By Moon Of Alabama

September 17, 2019 "Information Clearing House" -   Over the last decades Russia and Iran both needed to develop means to protect themselves against an ever growing threat from the United States and its allies. Both found unique ways to build deterrence that fit their situation.
Neither the U.S. nor its allies reacted to those developments by adopting their strategies or military means. It is only recently that U.S. woke up to the real situation. The loss of half its oil export capacity may finally wake up Saudi Arabia. Most other U.S. allies are still asleep.
When NATO extended into east Europe and the U.S. left the Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty Russia announced that it would develop countermeasures to keep the U.S. deterred from attacking it. Ten years later Russia delivered on its promise.
It had developed a number of new weapons that can defeat the ballistic missile defense the U.S. installed. It also put emphasis on its own air and missile defense as well as on radar and on electronic countermeasures that are so good that a U.S. general described as "eye-watering".
All this allowed Putin to troll Trump by offering him Russian hypersonic missiles. As we analyzed:

Trump is wrong in claiming that the U.S. makes its own hypersonic weapons. While the U.S. has some in development none will be ready before 2022 and likely only much later. Hypersonic weapons are a Soviet/Russian invention. The ones Russia now puts into service are already the third generation. U.S. development of such missiles is at least two generations behind Russia's.That Russian radar can 'see' stealth aircraft has been known since 1999 when a Yugoslav army unit shot down a U.S. F-117 Nighthawk stealth aircraft. Russian air and missile defense proved in Syria that it can defeat mass attacks by drones as well as by cruise missiles. U.S.-made air and missile defense in Saudi Arabia fails to take down even the primitive missiles Houthi forces fire against it.

Yesterday, during a press conference in Ankara with his Turkish and Iranian colleagues, Putin trolled Saudi Arabia (video @38:20) with a similar offer as he had made to Trump:

Q: Does Russia intend to provide Saudi Arabia with any help or support in restoring its infrastructure?Putin: As for assisting Saudi Arabia, it is also written in the Quran that violence of any kind is illegitimate except when protecting one’s people. In order to protect them and the country, we are ready to provide the necessary assistance to Saudi Arabia. All the political leaders of Saudi Arabia have to do is take a wise decision, as Iran did by buying the S-300 missile system, and as President Erdogan did when he bought Russia’s latest S-400 Triumph anti-aircraft system. They would offer reliable protection for any Saudi infrastructure facilities.
President of Iran Hassan Rouhani: So do they need to buy the S-300 or the S-400?
Vladimir Putin: It is up to them to decide.

Erdogan, Rouhani and Putin all laughed over this exchange.
U.S. allies, who have to buy U.S. weapons, have followed a similar defense investment strategy as the U.S. itself. They bought weapon systems that are most useful for wars of aggression but did not invest in defensive weapon systems that are needed when their enemies prove capable of hitting back.

Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda? Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

That is the reason why Saudi Arabia has more than 350 modern fighter planes but only relatively few medium and long range air defense systems that root back to the 1970s.
The Saudi air defense is only able to protect certain economic and social centers. Most of its borders and its military bases are not covered.

[T]he point-defense layout of the network leaves large portions of the nation undefended by strategic SAM assets. While aircraft can be called upon to defend these areas if required, the presence of large gaps in the nationwide air defense picture leaves numerous vulnerabilities open to exploitation by a foreign aggressor.

Saudi air defense as documented by Amir at Iran GeoMil.
Moreover the protection it has in place is unidirectional. The red circles designate the theoretical reach of the U.S. made PAC-2 air defense systems installed at their center. But the real reach of these systems only cover less than a half-circle. The PAC-2 and PAC-3 systems are sector defenses as their radars do not rotate. They can only see an arc of 120°. In the case of the Saudis those radars only look towards the east to Iran whcih is the most likely axis of attack. That left the crude oil processing plant in Abqaiq completely unprotected against attacks from any other direction. Neither Saudi Arabia nor the U.S. know from where the attack really came.
The Russian experience against the U.S. directed drone swarm attacks against its airbase Hmeymim in Syria showed that short range air defenses and electronic countermeasures are the best defense against mass drone and cruise missile attacks.
Saudi Arabia does not have short range air defenses against drones and cruise missiles because the U.S. does not have such systems. It also does not have sophisticated electronic countermeasures because the U.S. can not provide any decent ones.
What the Saudis need are the Russian Pantsyr-S1 short range air defense, dozens of them, and the Krasukha-4 electronic warfare system. The Russian may well offer at least the first item. But would the U.S. allow the Saudis to buy them?
Saudi Arabia, like the U.S., never took its opponents serious. It bombed Yemen to smithereens and never expected to be hit back. It long rallied the U.S. to wage war on Iran but took little measures to protect itself from an Iranian counter reaction.
After the long range attack from Yemen in August it was warned that the Houthi's missile reach had increased. Saudi Arabia ignored the warning and it took zero notable measures to protect Abqaiq processing center which is a choke point for half its income.
Iran, in contrast, developed its weapons along an asymmetric strategy just as Russia did.
Iran does not have a modern airforce. It does not need one because it is not aggressive. It has long developed other means to deter the U.S., Saudi Arabia and other opponents in the Middle East. It has a large number of self developed medium range ballistic missiles and a whole zoo of short to medium range drones and cruise missiles. It can hit any economic or military target within their 2,000 kilometer reach.
It also makes its own air defenses which recently enabled it to take down an expensive U.S. drone. Here is General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of IRGC's Aerospace Force, explaining how that was done (video, engl. subs).
Iran developed relations to friendly population groups in other countries and trained and equipped them with the necessary defensive means. These are Hizbullah in Lebanon, various groups in the Syria, the PMG/Hashd in Iraq, the Houthi in Yemen and Islamic Jihad in Gaza.
None of these groups is a full proxy for Iran. They all have their own local politics and will at times disagree with their big partner. But they are also willing to act on Iran's behalf should the need arise.
Iran developed a number of weapons exclusively for its allies that differ from the ones it itself uses. It enables its partners to build those weapons themselves. The cruise missile and drones that the Houti in Yemen use are different from the one Iran uses for its own forces.

New drones and missiles displayed in July 2019 by Yemen’s Houthi-allied armed forces

Iran has thereby plausible deniability when attacks like the recent one on Abquiq happen. That Iran supplied drones with 1,500 kilometer reach to its allies in Yemen means that its allies in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq and elsewhere have access to similar means.
The Saudis long failed to take Iran's counter strategy into considerations just like the U.S. failed to consider the Russian one. Both will have to change their aggressive strategies. Both will now have (re-)develop real defensive means.

Provoking Iran Could Start a War and Crash the Entire World Economy

Federico PIERACCINI

Tensions in the Persian Gulf are reaching a point of no return. In recent weeks,six oil tankers have been subjected to Israeli sabotage disguised to look like Iranian attacks to induce the United States to take military action against the Islamic Republic. Some days ago Iran rightfully shot out of the sky a US Drone. In Yemen, the Houthis have finally started responding with cruise and ballistic missiles to the Saudis’ indiscriminate attacks, causing damage to the Saudi international airport of Abha, as well as blocking, through explosive drones, Saudi oil transportation from east to west through one of the largest pipelines in the world.

As if the political and military situation at this time were not tense and complexenough, the two most important power groups in the United States, the Fed and the military-industrial complex, both face problems that threaten to diminish Washington’s status as a world superpower.

The Fed could find itself defending the role of the US dollar as the world reserve currency during any conflict in the Persian Gulf that would see the cost of oil rise to $300 a barrel, threatening trillions of dollars in derivatives and toppling the global economy.

The military-industrial complex would in turn be involved in a war that it would struggle to contain and even win, destroying the United States’ image of invincibility and inflicting a mortal blow on its ability to project power to the four corners of the world.

Just look at how surprised US officials were about Iran’s capabilities to shot down an advanced US Drone:

“Iran’s ability to target and destroy the high-altitude American drone, which was developed to evade the very surface-to-air missiles used to bring it down, surprised some Defense Department officials, who interpreted it as a show of how difficult Tehran can make things for the United States as it deploys more troops and steps up surveillance in the region.”

The Fed and the defense of the dollar

The US dollar-based economy has a huge debt problem caused by post-2008 economic policies. All central banks have lowered interest rates to zero or even negative, thus continuing to feed otherwise dying economies.

The central bank of central banks, the Bank for International Settlements, an entity hardly known to most people, has stated in writing that “the outstanding notional amount of derivative contracts is 542 trillion dollars.” The total combined GDP of all the countries of the world is around 75 trillion dollars.

With the dimensions of the problem thus understood, it is important to look at how Deutsche Bank (DB), one of the largest financial institutions in the world, is dealing with this. The German bank alone has assets worth about 40 trillion dollars in derivatives, or more than half of annual global GDP.

Their solution, not at all innovative or effective, has been to create yet another bad bank into which to pour at least 50 billion dollars of long-term assets, which are clearly toxic.

Reuters explains:

“The bad bank would house or sell assets valued at up to 50 billion euros ($56 billion) – after adjusting for risk – and comprising mainly long-dated derivatives.

The measures are part of a significant restructuring of the investment bank, a major source of revenue for Germany’s largest lender, which has struggled to generate sustainable profits since the 2008 financial crisis.”

Thus, not only has Deutsche Bank accumulated tens of billions of dollars in unsuccessful options and securities, it seeks to obtain a profit that has been elusive since 2008, the year of the financial crisis. Deutsche Bank is full of toxic bonds and inflated debts kept alive through the flow of quantitative easing (QE) money from the European Central Bank, the Fed and the Japanese Central Bank. Without QE, the entire Western world economy would have fallen into recession with a chain of bubbles bursting, such as in public and private debt.

If the economy was recovering, as we are told by soi-disant financial experts, the central-bank rates would rise. Instead, rates have plummeted for about a decade, to the extent of becoming negative loans.

If the Western financial trend is undoubtedly heading towards an economic abyss as a result of the monetary policies employed after 2008 to keep a dying economy alive, what is the rescue plan for the US dollar, its status as a global-reserve currency, and by extension of US hegemony? Simply put, there is no rescue plan.

There could not be one because the next financial crisis will undoubtedly wipe out the US dollar as a global reserve currency, ending US hegemony financed by unlimited spending power. All countries possessing a modicum of foresight are in the process of de-dollarizing their economies and are converting strategic reserves from US or US-dollar government bonds to primary commodities like gold.

The military-industrial complex and the harsh reality in Iran

In this economic situation that offers no escape, the immediate geopolitical effect is a surge of war threats in strategic locations like the Persian Gulf. The risk of a war of aggression against Iran by the Saudi-Israeli-US axis would have little chance of success, but it would probably succeed in permanently devastating the global economy as a result of a surge in oil prices.

The risk of war on Iran by this triad seems to be the typical ploy of the bad loser who, rather than admit defeat, would rather pull the rug out from under everyone’s feet in order to bring everybody down with him. Tankers being hit and then blamed on Iran with no evidence are a prime example of how to create the plausible justification for bombing Tehran.

Upon closer examination, it becomes apparent that the actions of Bolton and Pompeo seem to be aligned in prolonging the United States’ unipolar moment, continuing to issue diktats to other countries and failing to recognize the multipolar reality we live in. Their policies and actions are accelerating the dispersal of power away from the US and towards other great powers like Russia and China, both of which also have enormous influence in the Persian Gulf.

The threat of causing a conflict in the Persian Gulf, and thereby making the price of oil soar to $300 a barrel, will not save US hegemony but will rather end up accelerating the inevitable end of the US dollar as a global reserve currency.

Trump is in danger of being crushed between a Fed that sees the US dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency collapse, and the need for the Fed to blame someone not linked to the real causes of the collapse, that is to say, the monetary policies adopted through QE to prolong the post-crisis economic agony of 2008.

At the same time, with Trump as president, the neocon-Israeli-Saudi supporters see a unique opportunity to strike Iran, a desire that has remained unchanged for 40 years.

As foolish as it may seem, a war on Iran could be the perfect option that satisfies all power groups in the United States. The hawks would finally have their war against Tehran, the world economy would sink, and the blame would fall entirely on Trump. The Donald, as a result, would lose any chance of being re-elected so it makes sense for him to call off possible strikes as he did after the US drone was shot out of the sky.

While unable to live up to his electoral promises, Trump seems to be aware that the path laid out for him in the event of an attack on Iran would lead to his political destruction and probably to a conflict that is militarily unsustainable for the US and especially its Saudi and Israeli allies. It would also be the catalyst for the collapse of the world economy.

In trying to pressure Iran into new negotiations, Trump runs the risk of putting too much pressure on Tehran and giving too much of a free hand to the provocations of Pompeo and Bolton that could end up triggering a war in the Strait of Hormuz.

Putin and Xi Jinping prepare for the worst

Our current geopolitical environment requires the careful and considered attention of relevant heads of state. The repeated meetings between Putin and Xi Jinping indicate that Russia and China are actively preparing for any eventuality. The closer we get to economic collapse, the more tensions and chaos increase around the world thanks to the actions of Washington and her close allies.

Xi Jinping and Putin, who have inherited this chaotic situation, have met at least a dozen times over the last six months, more recently meeting at least three times over two months. The pressing need is to coordinate and prepare for what will inevitably happen, once again trying to limit and contain the damage by a United States that is completely out of control and becoming a danger to all, allies and enemies alike.

As Putin just recently said:

“The degeneration of the universalistic model of globalization and its transformation into a parody, caricature of itself, where the common international rules are replaced by administrative and judicial laws of a country or group of countries.

The fragmentation of global economic space with a policy of unbridled economic selfishness and an imposed collapse. But this is the road to infinite conflict, trade wars and perhaps not just commercial ones. Figuratively, this is the road to the final struggle of all against all.

It is necessary to draft a more stable and fair development model. These agreements should not only be written clearly, but should be observed by all participants.

However, I am convinced that talking about a world economic order such as this will remain a pious desire unless we return to the center of the discussion, that is to say, notions like sovereignty, the unconditional right of each country to its own path to development and, let me add, responsibility in the universal sustainable development, not just its own.”

The spokesman of the Chancellery of the People’s Republic of China, Hua Chun Ying, echoed this sentiment:

“The American leaders say that ‘the era of the commercial surrender of their country has come to an end’, but what is over is their economic intimidation of the world and their hegemony.

The United States must again respect international law, not arrogate to itself extraterritorial rights and mandates, must learn to respect its peers in safeguarding transparent and non-discriminatory diplomatic and commercial relations. China and the United States have negotiated other disputes in the past with good results and the doors of dialogue are open as long as they are based on mutual respect and benefits.

But as long as these new trade disputes persist, China informs the government of the United States of America and the whole world that it will immediately impose duties on each other, unilaterally on 128 products from the United States of America.

Also, we think we will stop buying US public debt. It’s all, good night!”

I wonder if Europeans will understand all this before the impending disaster. I doubt it.

Federico PIERACCINI

Independent freelance writer specialized in international affairs, conflicts, politics and strategies

Donald the Destroyer

By:MELVIN GOODMAN

The mainstream media is concerned with the politics, policies, and propaganda of President Donald Trump, but underplays the central question of his presidency: Is Donald Trump psychologically fit to be  president of the United States and commander-in-chief?  Over the past twelve months, psychiatrists and clinical psychologists have produced two books (“The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump” and “Rocket Man: Nuclear Madness and the Mind of Donald Trump”) to warn that our dangerously disordered president is a threat to domestic and international security.  According to an article in Newsweek in March 2018, most Americans agree that Donald Trump is unfit to be president.

The mental health experts who have produced these books have had to ignore the ethical principle of the American Psychiatric Association known as the “Goldwater Rule,” which prohibited psychiatrists from diagnosing a public figure they had not personally interviewed.  The erratic behavior of Donald Trump as a candidate in 2015-2016 and as president in 2017-2018 has led to a challenging ethical principle known as the “duty to warn” because of the danger he has created.  In every area of American policy, Trump’s actions and statements have created the highest level of domestic and international anxiety since the end of World War II.

For the past several years, we have witnessed what psychiatrists have referred to as Trump’s malignant narcissism, citing his claims that he knows more than anyone else and that only he can fix our problems.  His demonization of the press and his opponents as well as his treatment of minorities and his handling of immigration issues point to paranoia .  The separation of immigrant families demonstrated the lack of empathy that accompanies narcissism.

His claims about the size of his inauguration crowd and the weather conditions that day suggest that he is delusional. His lack of impulse control is particularly worrisome in a nuclear age that presents no real checks and balances on a commander-in-chief’s role in the use of nuclear weapons. Similarly, his inability to process information rapidly and dispassionately, and his unwillingness to accept information from experts, particularly in the intelligence community, are dangerous attributes.

The combination of paranoia and impulse control is most worrisome because it can lead to destructive acts.  According to White House sources, a series of Trump’s rants were followed by the declaration of a trade war that could hurt global economic output and would find the United States vulnerable to tariff retaliation from others.  The ugly exchanges between the United States and North Korea and once again the United States and Iran raises the potential for more unwinnable wars similar to our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan.  There are no limits to Trump’s bombast.

As a result, Trump has faced an unusual level of public criticism from his own appointees, including chief of staff John Kelly, former secretary of state Rex Tillerson, former national security adviser H.R. McMaster, and most recently Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats.  Since Kelly and McMaster were general officers, and the professional military is not permitted to criticize a sitting president, their views were particularly striking. The criticism by Tillerson and McMaster cost them their jobs, and they were replaced by loyalists, Mike Pompeo at the State Department and John Bolton at the National Security Council, who are far more supportive and even obsequious toward the president and less likely to moderate Trump’s impulsive behavior.

The mere thought of Trump and Bolton discussing national security policy and the use of force is particularly frightening.  Both men have impulsive and explosive natures, and are obsessively fixated on undoing the legacy of Barack Obama.  Trump’s biographers point to dangerous elements of irritability and aggressiveness as well as a pattern of deceitful behavior in his personal life.  Both men have engaged in irresponsible talk about nuclear weapons; Trump told interviewers that it was pointless to have nuclear weapons unless we were willing to use them.  Bolton has favored preemptive attacks against Iran and North Korea.  Trump ignores intelligence assessments, and Bolton has a record of misusing intelligence in past statements to the UN General Assembly and Security Council.

Long before his bizarre behavior in July at the NATO summit in Brussels, the state visit to the UK, and the horrendous Helsinki summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump has demonstrated an obsession with blowing up the Obama legacy and the dignity of his presidential opponent Hillary Clinton. He has walked away from the Iran nuclear accord and the Paris climate accord; challenged the resumption of relations with Cuba; and alienated long-time allies in the European Union and NATO. Trump has angered Canada and Mexico with calls to renegotiate NAFTA; initiated tit-for-tat measures with China; and infuriated the leaders of Britain, France, and Germany. Conversely, he seeks close relations with authoritarian figures, including Putin, Chinese leader Xi Jinping, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

While the mainstream media continues to discuss Trump in terms of some doctrine or playbook, it has failed to speculate on the terrible consequences of a commander-in-chief who is a malignant narcissist without impulse control.  Trump’s instability and unpredictability were on display throughout the campaign and the first months of his presidency, but his “diplomatic” endeavors in June and July with regard to North Korea, NATO, the European Union, and Russia were erratic and impulsive.

His first public appearance as president at CIA headquarters in January 2017 provided ample evidence of his delusional and hyperbolic tendencies.  His senior staff, including cabinet members, have given off-the-record accounts of his tantrums and lies.  His public appearances have demonstrated incredible ignorance, on the one hand, or outright deceit, on the other.   It’s not a matter of Trump’s lack of a “moral compass,” but the absence of any compass whatsoever.  It begs the question of whether the President is even compos mentes.

The dizzying pace of policy reversals and the back-and-forth over Russian interference in the 2016 election in the wake of the Helsinki summit provided more evidence of a lack of psychological maturity and self-regulation.  Trump’s truckling toward Putin is inexplicable, and the confusion over his possible military and diplomatic commitments in their private talks have flummoxed his national security team.  At best, he is an erratic president; at worst, he is mentally ill.

These worrisome characteristics were in full view before the election.  At a campaign rally in Iowa in 2015, Trump declared that “I’ve had lots of wars of my own.  I’m really good at war.  I love war….”  When former secretary of state Tillerson referred to Trump as a “fucking moron,” it was in response to Trump’s case for expanded nuclear forces and the willingness to use such forces against non-nuclear states.  Since assuming the presidency, Trump has declared war on governance, intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, public service, and fact-finding, particularly in the scientific community. His loose language on expanding the nuclear arsenal and the usefulness of low-yield nuclear weapons has led to congressional discussion to check the president’s unilateral authority to launch nuclear weapons.

When Vice President Dick Cheney proposed radical changes to nuclear doctrine and use of force in the administration of George H.W. Bush, the National Security Council and the Pentagon pushed back and Bush’s national security team rejected such notions.  There is no evidence that Secretary of Defense James Mattis is pushing back.  Furthermore, Trump now has in place a virtual war cabinet that includes Bolton at the National Security Council; Pompeo, an uberhawk, at the Department of State; and Gina Haspel, the CIA’s advocate for torture and abuse as the director of the agency.

The mainstream media describe Secretary of Defense Mattis as the only moderating “adult in the room” in the Trump administration, but he has kept his head below his breast plate since the Helsinki summit and has made no public comments in the wake of the president’s unprecedented attack on NATO and his coziness toward Putin during the crucial period in July.  It is unlikely that Mattis will be able to successfully challenge, let alone moderate, the most bellicose cabinet in U.S. history.

Trump’s truckling to Putin has fed speculation that he has become a victim of Russian “kompromat” due to excessive money laundering or salacious conduct in Moscow during his business trips.  If Trump has indeed been compromised, then Robert Mueller’s will have evidence from numerous intercepted messages.  But even without evidence, it is noteworthy that Trump appears willing to use Putin’s talking points on such issues as Montenegro; NATO; and the European Union.

Trump’s very first encounter with Russian officials in 2017 presaged his awkward behavior toward Putin. In dealing with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergei Kislyak in the White House in May 2017, Trump boasted that he gets “great intel.  I have people brief me on great intel every day.”  Trump even shared sensitive intelligence obtained from Israel with the Russians, which angered the intelligence community as well as members of the National Security Council.  A year later, when faced with the differing opinions of his intelligence tsar, Dan Coats, and the Russian president, Trump sided with Putin.

Trump’s body language with Putin was particularly striking.  No macho handshakes as with French President Macron.  No shoving aside as with Montenegrin President Dukanovic.  No arrogance and bullying as with British President May and German Chancellor Merkel.  The visuals with Putin are remarkable.  We see a very nervous and withdrawn Trump; an obsequious Trump; a Trump who reifies the policy positions of Putin.  The only other head of state who gets such a submissive attitude is Israeli President Bibi Netanyahu.  And like Netanyahu, Putin displayed at the joint press conference a confident, even smirking, manner that pointed to success.  Yet, Trump cannot stop talking about how tough he is on Russia.

Some of Trump’s truckling speaks to ignorance.  Only a fool would describe Putin’s offer to allow U.S. questioning of indicted Russian military intelligence officials in exchange for Russian questioning of Americans suspected of illegal activity as “incredible.” Putin’s list of Americans included former ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul.  Indeed, the proposal was incredible…incredibly unacceptable.  But it took Trump and his national security team nearly four days (and a 98-0 vote in the Senate) to reject what press spokesman Sara Huckabee Sanders referred to as Putin’s “sincere” proposal.  A day earlier, Sanders referred to Putin’s proposal as “under consideration,” which prompted even Secretary of State Pompeo, a diplomatic neophyte, to preemptively reject Putin’s “incredible” offer.  Perhaps Trump has not been compromised by Russian intelligence, but he acts as if he were.

If Trump were not president of the United States, he would not be able to obtain a security clearance. (There has never been a White House staff, moreover, that has had greater difficulty in obtaining security clearances to see highly sensitive information.)  Bolton could never obtain Senate confirmation of a key national security position, which explains his posting as National Security Adviser that has no such requirement. Trump’s temperament and his “war cabinet” have jeopardized U.S. alliances and compromised international understandings on trade, migration, and climate change.  No president in U.S. history has done more harm to U.S. credibility and standing in the global community.  The twin dangers of war, even nuclear war, as well as climate catastrophe are on the horizon.

The assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and the fact the Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson had once suffered a heart attack as well as the advanced years of the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempor of the Senate led to the passage of the 25th Amendment in 1967 to regulate the succession to a president who is deemed “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”  Trump has demonstrated he is unfit to serve, but the amendment requires a vote of the majority of the Cabinet as well as two-thirds of the House and Senate to validate such a succession.  Like the possibility of impeachment or indictment, the invocation of the 25th Amendment is extremely unlikely.

It remains to be seen what the Mueller investigation and the possibility of “kompromat” stemming from money laundering or salacious behavior in Moscow will do to the Trump presidency.  Trump presumably believes that he won’t be impeached and that he can’t be indicted. Our limited experience with impeachment suggests it is unlikely that even real change in the Congress as a result of the November elections will lead to impeachment.  Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton survived the impeachment vote in the House of Representatives in 1868 and 1998, respectively.  Only Richard Nixon voluntarily left the White House in 1974 to avoid an impeachment that the Senate probably would have validated.

In the meantime, these issues are distractions from the real threat to the United States and the American people, which is the irrational and impulsive nature of the president himself.  As a result, the American people and the entire international community are held hostage.  Two more years of Trump’s demagoguery and misogyny will do incalculable harm to American democracy.

Trump’s Trumping in Helsinki Bolsters Iran’s Indomitable Stance

As we had forecast in our Viewpoint Column of Monday, July 16, US president, Donald Trump, was not just outwitted by his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, at the summit in Helsinki on Tuesday, July 16, but so thoroughly trumped that the whole US, including his Republican party, is calling him a "disgrace for the nation”, if not a "traitor”. We had said day-before-yesterday in our column titled "Trump’s Diplomatic Misdemeanor Set to Boomerang Badly”, following his fiasco in Belgium and Britain: "Thus, shunned by all and liked by no one, Trump now heads to Helsinki, the capital of Finland, for a summit with President Vladimir of Russia, a master politician, who will certainly hold his ground on Crimea and Ukraine, without yielding to any outlandish demands regarding Syria, where the illegal American military presence has no chance of survival.” Even with his supporters trying to distance themselves from him now, we are not sure what sort of trumping Trump will receive at the hands of the Congress or whether he will be impeached as the most idiotic president in US history who meekly surrendered to arch rival Russia. Whatever the outcome, judging from his sickening rhetoric against Iran during the press conference in Helsinki that made no impression upon Putin, the Don Quixote in the White House is expected to continue the suicidal course he has chosen. Trump, who was outsmarted last June in Singapore by North Korean Leader, Kim Jong-un, is incapable of understanding that the Islamic Republic of Iran is too resilient a popular system of government to succumb to his economic sanctions or military threats. He is free to rave and rant to his heart’s content while he is still at the helm of affairs in Washington, but he can neither legitimize the existence of the illegal Zionist entity nor force Iran to withdraw its advisors from Syria, or for that matter stop Tehran’s principled support for Iraq’s Hashd ash-Sha’bi, Palestine’s freedom fighters, the popular Ansarallah movement of Yemen, Bahrain’s long suppressed majority, Afghanistan’s oppressed people, and Lebanon’s legendry anti-terrorist organization, the Hezbollah – let alone end the Islamic Republic’s peaceful nuclear project, aerospace programme, and rapidly expanding missile defense technology. We, however, expect some real soul-searching at the decision-making centres in the US, in the wake of Trump’s dismal performance vis-à-vis Putin in Helsinki where the thug in him appeared like a kitten, coupled with his belittling of the FBI and other American intelligence agencies, whose heads are now furious at his stupidity.

It should be clear to most Americans now that a madman who undermines the credibility of the nation by breaching international accords, bragging about military weapons, selecting hoodlums and conmen as administration officials, disturbing the world trade order, betting upon losing horses in West Asia such as the rootless, repressive, unrepresentative reactionary Arab regimes, and calling traditional allies like the EU, "foes”, will bring further disaster to the US, if his powers are not slashed. As for Europe, it is about time it realized that the US and its hegemonic heads do not belong to the Old World, of which Russia, Iran and the other Asian and African countries are integral parts, which warrants peace, harmony, co-existence and uninterrupted economic and trade ties without bowing to trans-Atlantic pressures. As the wily Putin threw to a surprised Trump the football he had brought to Finland, fresh from hosting the FIFA World Cup, the ball is now in the US court – as its president sheepishly acknowledged, without the least clue on fair play and sporting spirit. The Islamic Republic is grateful to God Almighty that its foe is a fool – as we recite in one of the supplications in Sahifa-e Sajjadiyyah of Imam Zain al-Abedin (AS), the 4th Infallible Heir of the Almighty Last and Greatest Messenger to all mankind, Prophet Muhammad (SAWA). -Kayhan Int’l