Archive for the ‘GEOPOLITICS’ Category

FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH CALLS FOR IMPROVED TRILATERAL RELATIONS OF USA, SOUTH KOREA AND JAPAN

October 6, 2019

The Washington Times on October 5, 2019 reported on Newt Gingrich at a Japan summit calling for US Asia allies to rally in face of growing challenges from North Korea, China and Russia. Excerpts below:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told an audience in Japan on October 5, 2019, that the U.S., South Korea and Japan need to improve trilateral relations in the face of growing challenges from North Korea, China and Russia.

“We can only be effective if we work with our allies,” Mr. Gingrich said at the Japan Summit and Leadership Conference in Nagoya, Japan. “It is vital to all three of us to find a way to reach past some of the grievances, and scrambling some of the politicians’ maneuvers, and find ways to come together and recognize how much more we have in common than separate.”

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said last week he wants to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un despite Pyongyang’s renewed testing of missiles.

North Korea resumed missile tests ahead of the scheduled resumption of nuclear negotiations with the United States.

Mr. Abe also insisted that Seoul must withdraw demands for Japanese wartime compensation beyond what was already paid under the peace treaty.

Comment: The call for improved relations between the United States and its main Asian allies is geopolitically important. Gingrich is an intellectually fearless visionary and historian, He is one of the foremost economic, social, political, and security-focused conservative thinkers of today. As politician he is well-known as the architect of the “Contract with America” that led the Republican Party to victory in 1994 by capturing a majority in the United States House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years.

Today, Gingrich is Chairman of Gingrich 360, a full-service American consulting, education, and media production group that connects the past, present, and future to inspire audiences, solve challenges, and develop opportunities. The company serves a Fortune 500 client base with consulting services and creates award-winning, entertaining media projects.

Newt’s World is an important podcast, a dynamic new weekly series that offers context to today’s world through entertaining stories and conversations.

A prolific author, he has published 36 books including 16 fiction and nonfiction New York Times best sellers.

He also taught officers from all five services as a distinguished visiting scholar and professor at the National Defense University served as a Member of the Defense Policy Board and of the Terrorism Task Force for the Council on Foreign Relations.

The former speaker of the House is married to Callista Gingrich, an American diplomat. The Gingriches have two daughters and two grandchildren.

Advertisements

CHINA GLOBAL STRATEGY TARGETING AMERICAN ECONOMY

September 7, 2019

Ret. USAF Brigadier General Robert Spalding in a June 2019 interview on radio warned that the geopolitical China threat to the United States had not been adressed strategically. Spalding has served at the White House as the Senior Director for Strategic Planning at the National Security Council, Washington D.C.:

China wages economic warfare against the U.S, said Spalding. It supports — and enriches itself off of — America’s competitors in Asia and the Middle East.

To approach this effectively the United States must work with its allies. In the Middle East with the Saudis and other Arab states and in Asia with mainly Japan and South Korea.

Spalding further said that in each of these regions, the partners there have to step up. America must reinvest in the country and grow the economy.

The focus has to be on deterrence and the growth of economy. Don’t spend all your money on weapons and focus on growing your economy. Military capacity cannot be separated from economic capacity, the brigadier general continued.

The United States must build and rebuild in the field of infrastructure and things that are actually growing the economy. If you don’t have a strong economy, it doesn’t matter, because you’re not going to be able to pay for the things you need to secure yourself.

When China entered the WTO, America closed 78,000 factories. 5.4 million people were put out of work. We closed ship-building facilities. We closed so much of our manufacturing capability that today we’re heavily reliant on the Chinese to provide the things we need to fight.

Spalding also said that the Chinese have managed to buy global ports and buying most of the global shipping — control the logistics. So think about that $800 billion defense budget we spend, and then all the money we’re spending to move and ship personnel and supplies all over the world, and you realize that the Chinese are making enormous sums out of what we do on a day-to-day basis. This is what they’ve built.

Spalding further highlighted China’s procurement of influence via financial relationship with America’s academia, businesses, entertainment and news media companies, non-profits and think tanks, and politicians.

The Chinese have studied the United States and the competition we had with the Soviet Union. They realized that if we ever became focused on their activities, then that would be tough for them because they relied on our openness in order to go after us. So they were essentially slowly eroding our personal freedoms through their economic and financial interaction with the country.

A large part of America’s elites have essentially aligned themselves — corporate interests, academia, politics, law firms, think tanks — with the Chinese Communist Party. The party knew that if it could go on to pursue that they could continue to slowly erode our competitive edge.

In essence, they want us to spend as much money as we can on defense, because that is not the area where they want to compete with us, Spalding warned. “They want us to bankrupt ourselves. That’s the goal.

President Donald Trump had in Spalding’s view reversed the status quo of America’s approach towards China set by his presidential predecessors. In 2017, the president basically said, ‘Enough is enough.’

They use the profits they make off the dealings with America to help the Iranians, to help the North Koreans, to help the Russians, both in a technological sense and economic sense,” concluded Spalding. He described Trump’s “decoupling” of America from dependence on Chinese exports and logistic as a means to reinforce America’s global positioning. China is aiding and abetting the countries that we try to put sanctions on. Whether or not they’re directly involved in the Iranians placing mines on tankers in the Persian Gulf, they’re complicit in that they’re enabling the Iranians to have the resources that enable them to do these things.

Orlyk, Pylyp

June 13, 2019

Orlyk and a part of his General Officer Staff emigrated in 1714 to Sweden, in 1720 to Silesia, and in 1721 to Poland. From 1722 until his death he was interned in Turkish-controlled territories—in Salonika until 1734, then in the Budzhak, and finally in Moldavia. During that period Orlyk sought, in vain, the support of Sweden, Poland, Saxony, Great Britain, Hannover, Holstein, the Vatican, and, through his son, Hryhor Orlyk, France. He also continued trying to organize, without success, a personal army and to incite the Zaporozhian Host to rise against Russian rule.

Orlyk wrote verses in Latin, the panegyrics Alcides Rossyiski (The Russian Alcides [Heracles], 1695) to Mazepa and Hippomenes Sarmacki (The Sarmatian Hippomenes, 1698) to Col Ivan Obydovsky, the political treatise ‘Vyvid prav Ukraïny’ (Devolution of Ukraine’s Rights, 1712), a manifesto to European governments justifying his alliance with the Porte (1712), and numerous memorandums to European rulers and government leaders. His diary of 1720–32 (5 vols) is preserved at the Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Paris. A book of Orlyk’s selected works, edited by Myroslav Trofymuk and Valerii Shevchuk, was published in Kyiv in 2006.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[Rawita-]Gawroński, F. ‘Filip Orlyk, nieuznany hetman kozacki,’ in Studya i szkice historyczne, ser 2 (Lviv 1900)
Holiichuk, F. ‘Fylyp Orlyk u Halychyni,’ in Naukovyi zbirnyk prysviachenyi M. Hrushevs’komu (Lviv 1906)
Iensen [Jensen], A. ‘Orlyk u Shvetsiï,’ ZNTSh, 92 (1909)
Kordt, V.A. (ed). ‘Dokumenty ob Andree Voinarovskom i Filippe Orlike,’ Sbornik statei i materialov po istorii Iugo-Zapadnoi Rossii, 2 (Kyiv 1916)
Borshchak, I. ‘Het’man Pylyp Orlyk i Frantsiia (storinky dyplomatychnoï istoriï),’ ZNTSh, 134–5 (1924); repr UIZh, 1991, nos 8–9, 11
Krupnyts’kyi, B. Het’man Pylyp Orlyk (1672–1742): Ohliad ioho politychnoï diial’nosty (Warsaw 1938)
Borschak, E. ‘Pylyp Orlyk’s Devolution of the Ukraine’s Rights,’ AUA, 6, nos 3–4 (1958)
Subtelny, O. The Mazepists: Ukrainian Separatism in the Early Eighteenth Century (New York 1981)
The Diariusz podrożny of Pylyp Orlyk (1727–1731), intro by Omeljan Pritsak (Cambridge, Mass 1988)
Iakovenko, Nataliia (ed.). Pylyp Orlyk: zhyttia, polityka, teksty (Kyiv 2011)
Häggman, Bertil. Hetman Filip Orlik – en ukrainsk frihetskaempe i Sverige 1715–1720 (Kristianstad 2014)

Theodore Mackiw
— Läs på www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp

PRESIDENT TRUMP AND CHANCELLOR MERKEL SPEAK ON UKRAINE

March 24, 2019

Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty on March 23, 2019, reported that President Trump and Chancellor Merkel have spoken via telephone on Ukraine and NATO during Trump’s weekend stay at Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida. Excerpts below:

A senior [American] administration official said the conversation covered funding for the NATO alliance.

German government spokesman Steffen Seibert said the conversation also covered issues related to Ukraine without being specific.

Ukrainian government forces have been fighting against Russia-backed separatists in Ukraine’s eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk since April 2014 in a conflict that has killed some 13,000 people — a quarter of them civilians.

Moscow has also seized and annexed Ukraine’s Crimea region…

Comment: Much of the focus of the U.S. administration has since 2017 been on East Asia and the Middle East. The contact between Trump and Merkel is a sign that Ukraine will get more attention during 2019. Merkel’s peace initiatives have not been successful. The conflict in eastern Ukraine is continuing. Ukraine needs stronger support from both the United States and EU. Ukrainians must feel secure that the West is really supportive of their efforts to join the family of democratic nations and escape from the grip of Russia.

IS RUSSIA ON ITS KNEES?

March 23, 2019

Washington Times on March 22, 2019 published an AP interview with Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin on his country’s road towards taking its place among Western European democracies. Excerpts below:

…Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin insisted that Ukraine has Russia on its knees, and that his country is making good progress toward taking its place among Western European democracies.

“Ukrainian society five years after Maidan is ripe enough … to fight for an independent democratic and European country, and for me part of this future is of course our membership in the European Union, in NATO,” he said.

“Ukraine is already part of the trans-Atlantic community. It should formally become part of this trans-Atlantic community.”

Klimkin [said] the standoff [with Russia] is hurting Moscow more than Kiev.

“Look at the economic development in Russia: no growth. Look at their societal development. Look at Russian demography. Russia is going nowhere under current conditions. And I believe that quite soon the Russian leadership will have simply to face this fact.”

“We have to do better with reforms here in the country. We have to do better with transforming our justice system. We have to do better with tackling corruption,” he said. “But if you … compare current Ukraine with Ukraine five years ago, right after Maidan, it’s completely a different country.”

“I’m not saying [that EU and NATO membership] will come tomorrow or after tomorrow. We have to be honest. It’s not a short-term exercise, but it will come,” he said.

“Ukrainians will not tolerate any kind of back off or veering off from this fundamental force.”

Comment: On March 31 Ukrainians will elect a president. Most likely there will be a second round in April with good chances for President Petro Poroshenko to be re-elected.

The war in the east with Russia is taking its toll and it is important that the United States supplies Ukraine with more defensive weapons. The European Union should step up negotiations with Ukraine for EU membership.

Russia is one of the three empires presently challenging the West. The loss of much of the influence in Ukraine has been a serious setback for Russia. With a new Ukrainian administration from April 2019 a more forward policy for the West on Ukraine is necessary when it comes to integrating Ukraine in the family of Western democracies.

EU PLANS TO BYPASS US IRAN SANCTIONS

January 31, 2019

The European Union is considering according to Euronews in January 2019 how it could step up plans to circumvent President Trump’s Iran sanctions. Excerpts below:

The EU Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) met in Brussels to examine options around what is known as a Special Purpose Vehicle [SPV]. This arrangement would function as a workaround to help European companies continue to do business with Tehran.

President Donald Trump in 2018 withdrew the US from an international 2015 deal to control Iran’s nuclear ambitions, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

The Trump administration warned that the deal did not prevent Iran from finding ways to develop nuclear weapons.

Comment: If the EU goes forward and decides to bypass the American sanctions against Iran it would endanger Western unity in face of Iran support of terrorism. Such a decision would also increase the threat to Israel.

GLOBALIST PROGRESSIVISM’S FOREIGN POLICY DELUSION

January 13, 2019

The American Conservative on September 24, 2018 reviewed John Mearsheimer’s latest book ”The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities”, John J. Mearsheimer, Yale University Press, 328 pages. For excerpts see below:

John J. Mearsheimer, the prominent exponent of foreign policy realism, is no stranger to controversy. The University of Chicago professor seems to home in on it like a heat-seeking missile.

His latest book, The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities, is a dagger pointed at the heart of America’s governing philosophy, progressive liberalism. His central thesis is that this philosophy has distorted U.S. foreign policy since America’s post-Cold War emergence as the world’s only superpower. The core of the problem, writes Mearsheimer, was America’s post-Cold War resolve to remake the world in its own image. The predictable result has been chaos, bloodshed, an intractable refugee crisis besetting the Middle East and Europe, and increased tensions among major powers…

The [United States] today enjoys the luxury of not having a single adversary capable of challenging its existence or global standing.

[Mearsheimer’s offensive realist theory] consists of: First, the world is “anarchic,” meaning there is no central authority or night watchman to step in when a nation is threatened. Therefore, nations must rely upon themselves for protection from any hazard, immediate or prospective. Given that they can’t know precisely the plans and ambitions of real or potential adversaries—he calls this “the uncertainty of intentions”—the imperatives of survival dictate that they do whatever they can to maximize their power based on what they can discern—namely, the military capabilities of potential rivals.

In other words, it’s…about the hierarchy of power among nations. Stability comes through an equilibrium of power, and great nations should foster diplomatic actions designed to maintain a power balance in key strategic locations.

…while progressive liberalism dominates American politics, including the country’s foreign policy, realism and nationalism ultimately are more powerful ideas. Mearsheimer notes, for example, that while liberalism and nationalism can coexist in any polity, “when they clash, nationalism almost always wins.” He adds that “liberalism is also no match for realism.”

Progressive liberals, [dominating thinking in the field of foreign policy] by contrast, have great faith in governmental activism that not only promotes individual rights but also pursues expansive social engineering programs.

…progressive liberals are the political heirs of Alexander Hamilton, Henry Clay, and, more recently, of Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson.

There is no doubt, says Mearsheimer, that progressive liberalism has triumphed…when it dominates a nation’s international relations, he emphasizes, it inevitably breeds disaster.

[Mearsheimer] makes clear he doesn’t believe progressive liberalism accords with human nature much at all.

Mearsheimer posits what he calls “two simple assumptions” about human nature. The first is that man’s ability to reason is limited, particularly when it comes to mastering the fundamental questions of existence.

The second assumption, related to the first, is that “we are social animals at our core.” Given that there can be no reasoning to core principles, there will always be disagreements on these fundamental and often emotional matters. That inevitably raises prospects for violence. For protection, mankind must divide itself into a great number of social groups, and the most fundamental of all human groups is the nation. “With the possible exception of the family,” writes Mearsheimer, “allegiance to the nation usually overrides all other forms of an individual’s identity.”

And this leads to Mearsheimer’s view of the essence of social groups—and, most particularly, of nations. He identifies six fundamental features of nationhood:

1) a powerful sense of oneness and solidarity

2) a distinct culture, including such things as language, rituals, codes, music, as well as religion, basic political and social values, and a distinct understanding of history

3) a sense of superiority leading to national pride

4) a deep sense of its own history, which often leads to myths that supersede historical fact

5) sacred territory and a perceived imperative to protect lands believed to be a hallowed homeland

6) and a deep sense of sovereignty and a resolve to protect national decision-making from outside forces

[The] universalist ideology has always been there, lurking in the liberal consciousness. Until recently it was seen most starkly in the humanitarian interventionism of Woodrow Wilson—hence the universally understood term “Wilsonism.”

This Wilsonian impulse was kept in check through most of the 20th century by the imperatives of realism and the ideological force of nationalism. That ended with the conclusion of the Cold War, when America emerged as the unchallenged global hegemon. The inevitable result was the rise of liberal hegemony. What’s interesting is how explosively it arrived on the scene, almost immediately gaining dominance over American foreign policy and positioning itself to stamp out any troublesome counterarguments. The universalist ideology presents a powerful allure, often leading to feelings among foreign policy liberals, per Wilson, that they are engaging in a monumental struggle of good and evil.

The result is that America has waged seven wars since the Cold War ended and has been at war continuously since the month after 9/11.

Bill Clinton embraced liberal hegemony from the beginning of his presidency in 1993, and it led him to military actions in Bosnia and Serbia, motivated largely by the humanitarian impulse. George W. Bush took it to new levels after 9/11 with his invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and his rhetoric that “the freedom we prize…is not for us alone, it is the right and the capacity of all mankind.” Barack Obama suggested as he was leaving office that he understood that the “Washington playbook” was “deeply flawed,” as Mearsheimer puts it, but he couldn’t seem to break away from it. “He was ultimately no match for the foreign policy establishment,” writes Mearsheimer.

[President Trump has] challenged almost every aspect of liberal interventionism, particularly the goal of spreading democracy around the world. But he predicts that the “foreign policy elites will tame him just as they tamed his predecessor.”

…consider Mearsheimer’s emphasis on “a sacred territory.” Today’s progressive liberals, particularly among the elites, don’t care a whit about the country’s borders, as Mearsheimer notes. “In the liberal story,” he writes, “state borders are soft and permeable, because rights transcend those boundaries.” Then there’s sovereignty. Mearsheimer writes that “liberalism undermines sovereignty.”

These and other related issues are tearing America apart, and they have been introduced into the political cauldron by the same progressive liberals who have been pushing America’s drive to spread liberal hegemony across the globe. Indeed, it is almost incontestable that these domestic and foreign policy issues, along with the progressive liberal push for free trade and supranational institutions that undermine American sovereignty, contributed significantly to Trump’s presidential election.

Although Mearsheimer doesn’t discuss the American elites in detail, he sprinkles into his argument several references to elite and establishment thinking as often being distinct from broader public impulses and sensibilities. “[I]t is important to note,” he writes, “that liberal hegemony is largely an elite-driven policy.” In another passage he notes that America’s foreign policy elites tend to be “cosmopolitan,” which isn’t to say, he adds, that most of them are like Samuel Huntington’s caricature of those Davos people “who have little need for national loyalty” and see “national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing.” But, adds Mearsheimer, “some are not far off.”

Yes, it’s the progressive liberal elites who are driving America’s push for humanitarian hegemony, and Mearsheimer’s book calls them out brilliantly. But those same elites are also driving wedges through the American polity on powerful domestic issues, thus poisoning our politics and fostering an ongoing crisis on the definition and meaning of America. Mearsheimer’s pungent critique of the elite’s foreign policy recklessness could provide a sound foundation for a broader critique of its destructive folly in a host of other civic areas as well.

Robert W. Merry, longtime Washington, D.C. journalist and publishing executive, is a writer-at-large for The American Conservative. His latest book is ”President McKinley: Architect of the American Century”.

ENFORCING THE MONROE DOCTRINE

January 12, 2019

Ted G. Carpenter in The National Interest on January 7, 2019, called for the Trump administration to adopt a firmer policy toward Moscow’s intrusions into Latin America.
Excerpts below:

The latest incident is Moscow’s decision to send two nuclear-capable bombers to Venezuela to show support for Nicolas Maduro’s leftist regime. Russian defense minister Sergei Shoigu said during a meeting with his Venezuelan counterpart Vladimir Padrino Lopez that Russia would continue to send military aircraft and warships meeting with his Venezuelan counterpart Vladimir Padrino Lopez that Russia would continue to send military aircraft and warships to visit Venezuela as part of continuing bilateral military cooperation.

Russia’s cooperation with Venezuela has grown markedly since tensions between Moscow and Washington flared in 2008 over Russia’s war with Georgia. A Russian general even spoke of the possibility of his country acquiring a military base in Venezuela. While civilian leaders in both Caracas and Moscow disavowed such intentions, Russian naval forces soon conducted joint maneuvers with Venezuelan units, and there was a proliferation of arms sales. In 2012, the Venezuelan government announced a $4 billion “loan” from Russia to purchase tanks, air-defense missiles, and other hardware. The bilateral political and security relationship has grown steadily closer since then.

Washington’s failure to enforce the Monroe Doctrine during the Cold War when the Soviet Union made Cuba into a client state and military outpost has not encouraged respect for that doctrine in the post-Cold War era. The Trump administration needs to adopt a firmer policy toward Moscow’s intrusions into Latin America.

A new policy is imperative. Washington DC must recognize that the United States and other major powers historically have insisted on a sphere of influence, indeed a sphere of preeminence, in regions adjacent to their homelands.

The geographic limits of such zones are frequently a matter of contention…

That is dangerously unrealistic thinking. Washington…needs to establish clear rules of the road regarding conduct in Latin America and Eastern Europe. U.S. leaders should stress to Moscow that establishing or maintaining military ties with unfriendly regimes like those in Venezuela and Cuba creates unacceptable…for the United States.

…United States [hopefully]intends to remain preeminent in the Western Hemisphere…

Ted Galen Carpenter is a senior fellow in security studies at the Cato Institute. He is the author of 12 books and more than 750 articles on international affairs.

Comment: In 2023 the United States will commemorate the 200th anniversary of the Monroe Doctrine. There might be reason to extend the use of the doctrine to cover also such empires in Eurasia as China and Iran.

HANS J. MORGENTHAU OM DEN INTERNATIONELLA KAMPEN OM MAKT

November 23, 2018

Hans J. Morgenthau (1904 – 1980) utvecklade en omfattande teori om internationella relationer i realistisk anda. Han var påverkad av den amerikanske protestantiske teologen och statsvetaren Reinhold Niebuhr (1892 – 1971), som liksom Thomas Hobbes ansåg att själviskhet och maktlystnad spelade en väsentlig roll i mänsklig samlevnad.

Detta beskrev Niebuhr med termen animus dominandi, en önskan att dominera, som är det främsta upphovet till internationella konflikter. Morgenthau slog i sitt huvudverk, ”Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace”, först utgivet 1948, fast att “international politics, like all politics, is a struggle for power”.

Här nedan följer en kort presentation av de grundläggande sex principerna enligt andra utgåvan av ”Politics among Nations”.

Grunden för Morgenthaus realistiska teori är maktbegreppet eller “ interest defined in terms of power”, vilket leder fram till hans andra princip: antagandet att politiska ledare “think and act in terms of interest defined as power” .
Morgenthaus tredje princip är att maktintresse är en universell kategori och en betydelsefull del av politiken. Innehåll och hur det utövas beror på den politiska och kulturella omgivningen.

Den fjärde principen tar hänsyn till förhållandet mellan realism och etik. Realister med sunt förnuft är medvetna om att politiskt handlande har moralisk betydelse och att det finns ett spänningsförhållande mellan moral och behovet av framgångsrik politisk verksamhet.

Försiktighet och inte övertygelse om den egna moralens och ideologins överlägsenhet bör vägleda politiskt handlande. Detta framhävs i den femte principen där det hävdas att alla statsaktörer inklusive den egna måste ses som politiska enheter som agerar för egna intressen inom ramen för makt och inflytande. Här kan anmärkas att försiktighet inte alltid kan var ledande vid beslut. Sunt förnuft består till nio tiondelar av att vara förståndig vid rätt tidpunkt.
Realismens sjätte princip är enligt den amerikanske realisten att politiken definieras som en självständig sfär. Den kan inte underställas etiken men etik spelar ändå en roll inom politiken.

Realismen är ett sätt att bedöma internationella relationer men är också ett användbart medel för att planera vid politiska avgöranden. Internationell politik är liksom all politik för Morgenthau en fråga om en kamp inom den politiska eliten om makten.

2018 IRANIAN UPRISING MEETING IN NEW YORK

September 26, 2018

Fox News on September 23, 2018, reported on comments by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani ahead of the 2018 Iranian Uprising Summit in New York. Presiden Donald Trump’s lawyer called for support for the Iranian resistance movement MEK. Excerpts below:

Giuliani advocated that a “peaceful” overthrow of the current Iranian vanguard is the only solution for a prosperous nation and stable Middle East.

…a fall, he said, could come at any moment.

“Who would have known the timeline in Russia or the timeline in Poland or the timeline in Hungary. When it happens it happens. We generally see a very repressive, very militaristic regime and think it can’t be overthrown. We don’t realize as people’s desire for freedom reaches a boiling point it can overcome that,” he continued. “Then it just happens. That’s what is going to happen here. We are going to wake up one morning and someone has been overthrown. It may not happen tomorrow, but it is inevitable the way they are oppressing people.”

“It is terrible that they have to be pressured this way…President Trump shows the world the road that President Reagan took in terms of communism. When he embraced solidarity, he said this protest movement is because these people are being oppressed. They are being treated horribly and because Iran is investing money in terrorism and not the people. That’s why the people are starving.”

Anti-government protests have been spilling out across Iran since January, of which Trump has tweeted support for those taking to the streets. And since withdrawing from the deal with Tehran, the president has stated he would be willing to “re-negotiate” what he deemed to be one of the worst deals ever formulated by Western leadership.

So what would such a new deal look like?

“There is no doubt what a re-negotiated deal would mean, and that is complete and absolute denuclearization of Iran and a change in which it supports terrorism throughout the world,” Giuliani conjectured. “Because they are an existential danger to us and to Israel and we can’t accept that. Those two things would be critical.”

“In other words, if they promised to de-nuclearize and they promised not to threaten the U.S. and Israel, [and] our allies, but they remained the kind of militaristic religious fanatic that kills people they aren’t going to keep their promise,” Giuliani noted.

“We call on the United States to expel the Iranian regime’s operatives from America. We urge Western governments to shut down or restrict the regime’s embassies, which are control centers for espionage and terrorism; and to expel this regime’s criminal forces from Syria and Iraq,” the [MEK’s] Paris-based female leader, Maryam Rajavi, told the thousand-plus crowd via video feed. “Iran’s seat at the United Nations does not belong to the terrorist regime ruling it. That seat belongs to the Iranian people and Resistance.”

“Of the last ten years that I have been involved with them [MEK] and I come to this event every year,” he added. “This is the first time I see hope that there can be real change in Iran.”

Comment: Iran has since ancient Greece been a challenger to the West. After it was taken over by a theocratic regime during the Cold War. It was a major strategic defeat for the United States and the West. Iran has since then developed into a major power in Eurasia and is projecting geopolitical power into Caucasus, the Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia.

Iran is working closely to Russia, another Eurasian challenger to the West.

President Trump’s speech to the United Nation General Assembly on September 25, 2018 targeted the Islamisat regime in Tehran: “They do not respect their neighbors or their borders or the sovereign rights of nations. Instead, Iran’s leaders plunder the nation’s resources to enrich themselves and to spread mayhem across the Middle East and far beyond”

“We cannot allow the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism to possess the planet’s most dangerous weapons. We cannot allow a regime that chants death to America and that threatens Israel with annihilation,” Trump said.

The United States is presently using the economic weapon against Iran much in the same way as against the Soviet Union during the Reagan administration. There are now clear signs that the regime in Tehran has weakened. A hopefully ”peaceful” overthrow is possible. It is important that the leading European allies of the United States join the sanctions against Iran.