Saudi Arabia and Israel don't want regime change in Iran, but would prefer to have an incompetent regime that mismanages the economy, and not allow it to truly live up to its full potential, author Trita Parsi told RT.

RT America's Ed Schultz discussed the latest developments on the Iranian deal with Trita Parsi, the author of 'Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy' and President of the National Iranian-American Council.

RT: Secretary Mike Pompeo laid down a 12-point list of demands for Iran. Meanwhile, most of the American people aren't really sure about getting out of the Iran nuclear deal. How do you think the Iranian people feel about what's unfolding?

Trita Parsi: I think what they're seeing right now is an effort by the Trump administration to escalate matters towards war. And one of the things that will have an effect on them, first of all, new sanctions are going to make their lives miserable. Even when Obama was putting all of these very crippling sanctions on the Iranians, it didn't cripple Iranian nuclear program. But it made life for ordinary Iranians very bad, including a medicine shortage. Now they're going to go back to that. But perhaps even more. Because at least, Obama was using this as a pressure method in order to be able to get a deal. I don't think we can say that John Bolton's idea is to use pressure in order to get a deal. This guy doesn't strike deals, this guy starts wars.

RT: Pompeo talked about economically squeezing the Iranian people. They want regime change. What does this mean? Does this mean this is going to be Iraq all over again?

TP: Here's a very fascinating thing. You have to remember that a lot of the reason why the Trump administration is doing this right now, beyond Trump's own animosity towards the deal because it has Obama's name on it, comes from the fact that the Saudis and the Israelis have been pushing Trump to do this. And if you're looking at this from Riyadh, you don't want regime change in Iran.

You actually prefer to have a regime that is pretty incompetent, that mismanages the economy and doesn't allow Iran to truly live up to its full potential. What you want is to start some form of a civil war inside of Iran that essentially eliminates to a large extent Iran's power and then shifts the balance of power back to the favor of Saudi Arabia and Israel. That's what I think they're looking for - the idea that the Saudis, who don't practice democracy themselves, want to see a democratic Iran, is quite laughable.

RT: Do you think this will strengthen the resolve of the Iranian people?

TP: We've seen in the past that when under attack, they are as capable, if not more capable, than almost any other nation to rally around the flag. And here's one reason as to why I think that might be even more true in this case. Even earlier on, when Obama imposed the sanctions, that was during a period in which Ahmadinejad, a highly unpopular presidential figure was running this show, under those circumstances they still rally around flag. This time around, the blame for collapsing the deal is squarely at the feet of Donald Trump. The Iranians have lived up to the agreement. The IAEA has confirmed that 10 times. I think that's going to make it much more difficult for the Trump administration to get some internal upheaval.

RT: The United Nations Security Council supported this. There are superpowers on board with this. And there have been some economic commitments to deal with Iran, as well, to help their economy. Where does that stand, now that the US is pulling out of this? Will these other countries live up to the commitment? And will the Iranians stay in the deal?

TP: The Iranians likely will stay in the deal, granted that the other countries continue to uphold their end of the bargain, but beyond that fill in where the US left. Because for the Iranians to agree to continue to restrict their program, they need to be given the economic benefits they were promised. But how can Europe force its companies to continue, or actually expand their investments in Iran, if those companies are going to be risking sanctions from the US government, if they do so? It needs a really strong political will on the European side to make sure that this happens.

RT: And yet Pompeo says the position of the US is that they want full diplomatic ties. Is that a possibility? Could that be a reality?

TP: There could be a reality if there actually was a genuine negotiation, there was a genuine effort to be able to bring about some sort of resolution to this long-standing conflict between the two countries. The JCPOA was an excellent start. The most imminent problem was resolved. And now they had conversations with each other and they could start to address many of these other issues. And the Iranians have a whole set of issues as well that they would like to address with the US. But Trump has actually taken a triumph of diplomacy and turned it into a crisis of choice.

RT: Let's talk about your book 'Triumph of diplomacy.' What's the main message here?

TP: The main message was that everyone thought it would be impossible to get the US and Iran to come to an agreement. People said that the Iranians will never come to the table; if they did, they would never agree to an agreement; if they did, they would never live up to that agreement. Look, what happened: they came to the table, they negotiated, they lived up to their agreement. And now it is actually Donald Trump that is pulling out of it.

RT: And you mentioned that maybe one of the reasons why Trump is getting out of this deal is because it has got Obama's name on it.

TP: The same deal, but with his name on it, he will do it in a split second… In his mind any deal done by him by definition is a better deal.

https://www.rt.com/news/427672-us-iran-trump-bolton-pompeo/

If Mike Pompeo’s ultimatum to Iran, after US withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear deal, was fulfilled it would inflict economic warfare on the country and set up Tehran for failure while reasserting a US-led unipolar world order.

However, it is doomed to failure. As Iranian President Hassan Rouhani pointed out following the US Secretary of State’s declaration mirroring the views of President Donald Trump’s new national security adviser, John Bolton, the era when the US will “decide for the world” is over.

Pompeo outlined the 12 demands on Iran in a speech on May 21 before the US think-tank Heritage Foundation. Even many of the conservative participants in attendance seemed to be skeptical of how effective the demands would be to prevent the US from imposing more onerous sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

Pompeo’s ultimatum demanded that Iran halt all uranium enrichment, with access to “all sites”“anywhere, anytime.” Yet, the Islamic Republic is a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which entitles it to enrich uranium for civilian use, as does the Iranian nuclear agreement, formerly known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

The ultimatum went well beyond anything to do with Iran’s nuclear program - demanding that the Islamic Republic halt its missile development, support for Hezbollah and Hamas and demanded that it withdraw all forces under the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from Syria, where it has been fighting along with Hezbollah against the Islamic State and al-Qaeda at the invitation of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Left unsaid in Pompeo’s demands was that the US is in Syria without invitation, supporting the jihadi Salafists who also are backed by Israel and Saudi Arabia and are threatening Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran itself.

Barbara Slavin, who directs the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, observed that Pompeo’s speech has “almost no chance of working. It’s likely to further alienate the US’s economic allies, boost China as a global economic and political power and gladden Iranian hardliners looking for more reason to start proscribed nuclear activities to continue their interventions in the Middle East.”

In plain-talk English, what Pompeo and Bolton want through their economic warfare against Iran is regime change. Pompeo is signaling an effort to reassert US leadership of a Western world order on Middle East countries, as are European Union countries in resisting Trump’s new brand of economic warfare.

Trump’s 180-degree turn represents a strategic change from his previous position of wanting to pull out of the Middle East. Strangely, it comes at the same time when Americans at home are just beginning to realize the benefits of the tax cut and creation of more jobs at home, promises that Trump said he would fulfill during the campaign.

But he also promised to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem and drop out of the JCPOA.  What has occurred is that one campaign promise has cancelled out the benefits of the other as a result of Trump imposing sanctions not only on Iran but on companies anywhere in the world that have contracts with US companies but continue trading with Iran.

In turn, he has created further tensions in the Middle East, prompting the price of oil to rise from $70 to $80 a barrel just in the week that I was in Iran. Such an increase is already being reflected in the rise of gasoline prices Americans are having to pay, thereby minimizing any benefit from tax savings.

Trump’s actions reflect the fact that the neo-conservatives advising him are back in full fury pursuing a new geopolitical strategy that mirrors what has been left undone following the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 when Saddam Hussein was removed as part of a pre-emptive policy of regime change throughout the Middle East.

When I was at the Defense Department during that period, I had an occasion to brief Bolton one time during which he outlined pursuing regime change not only in Iraq, but then in Syria, Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia – all countries at the time that were regarded as enemies of Israel. As with back then, we are witnessing the Trump administration implementing Israeli foreign policy.

Given the initial resistance by European Union countries to Trump’s sanctions and dropping out of the JCPOA - a watershed moment - they have signaled staying in the agreement. But that may not last due to sanctions the US can impose on European companies which have contracts with American firms that continue trading with Iran.

I recently was in Iran talking to Iranian officials just after Trump announced dropping out of the JCPOA. I was there at the 6th International New Horizons conference held in Iran’s spiritual city of Mashhad.

What emerged from the three-day conference was a call to resist Trump’s actions of reasserting his version of a US-led unipolar order by undertaking a “multi-polar” approach that will see a new economic order, with the idea of separating countries from American economic dependency and isolating the US and Israel.

What is evolving in response to the US dropping out of the JCPOA is a new world order that could begin to see Iran, China, Russia, Eastern European and Central Asian countries creating their own economic engine to minimize the impact of US influence.

It could include a reinvigorated Shanghai Cooperation Organization founded by China and Russia and Central Asian countries. With China nearing completion of its One Belt, One Road Initiative from Asia to Europe, it could open the way for European countries who are members of the EU and Eastern Europe to expand trade and escape the yoke of weaponized US economic influence. This development already appears to be happening.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has been dealing with Brexit, a long and tedious process to separate from the EU. She had hoped to turn to the US as an alternative, more favorable market. Yet, she has announced that she intends to resist Trump’s sanctions. Her efforts, however, may be short-lived, since Britain is only the size of Indiana and its companies could not survive without the US market. Consequently, she has begun to look to China as an alternative market.

In response to Trump’s recent action on the JCPOA, Russian President Vladimir Putin could once again extend an invitation to Iran to join the SCO. Putin already has said he sees no obstacles to Iran joining the SCO.

Its membership had been offered following completion of the 2015 nuclear agreement. However, the effort was rejected. This time, it could be different, since Iran is in full compliance with the JCPOA but Trump broke from that agreement.

Iranian officials told me that if the US wants to work with Iran, it needs to “decouple” its Israeli policy from dealing with the Islamic Republic. In effect, Trump has done everything Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sought – moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem and dropping out of the JCPOA.

They wondered who is controlling whom: Is Trump controlling Netanyahu, or is Netanyahu controlling Trump in conducting US foreign policy? One Iranian source at the University of Tehran told me that “what is definitely happening is that Iran is tilting heavily, and perhaps permanently, to China and Russia.”

“We are hoping for the best,” he said, but in the event Trump’s pressure on Iran turns kinetic, he added, “Iran is preparing for the worst.”

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/427553-iran-pompeo-demands-us/