Havana and Tehran : “It is clear that unilateral sanctions do not work”

Bookstore in Athens after riots of December 2008, by Kostisl / wikimedia

Bookstore in Athens after riots of December 2008, by Kostisl / wikimedia

“The announcement of Washington’s restoration of diplomatic relations with Havana prefigures that of relations with Tehran. The United States has not abandoned its imperialist ambitions and these two states have not renounced their revolutionary ideals. However, pragmatic, Washington acknowledges that Cuba and Iran will not be defeated by diplomatic isolation and economic war. He is preparing for another type of confrontation.” – Thierry Meyssan

***

Washington’s secret negotiations with Havana and Tehran

by Thierry Meyssan
voltarenet.org
Dec 22, 2014

The simultaneous announcement by Barack Obama and Raúl Castro of the restoration of diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba came as a surprise in Europe. As usual, Washington was negotiating secretly with its opponent, while imposing the EU sanctions that the US will hasten to lift the moment it is to its advantage.

For two years, President Obama has been trying to appease the conflicts between the US Empire and States who resist it: Cuba in Latin America, Iran in the “Greater Middle East”. Indeed, it is clear that unilateral sanctions, veritable acts of war initiated by Washington economically and extended to its allies, do not work. Cuba and the Islamic Republic of Iran have suffered greatly but have not stopped resisting.

Half a century of struggle

During the Cold War, Cuba was mobilized against the apartheid policy that South Africa intended to extend to its neighbors. The white regime in Pretoria was then supported by the US and Israel. The Cuban army was deployed in Angola and Namibia until the conclusion of a peace agreement in 1988. Fidel Castro was thus able to defeat an ideology dividing humanity into two: masters and slaves. However, it took another three years for the South African apartheid regime to be dismantled and for Nelson Mandela to become president of the South African people reunited.

Identically, the Islamic Republic of Iran mobilized against the policy of apartheid that Israel intends to extend to its neighbors. The Zionist regime in Tel Aviv has been supported by the United States and the United Kingdom since its illegal proclamation in 1948. It claims all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates. Iran supports Syria, Hezbollah and the Palestinian resistance organizations. Under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the United States and Israel have suffered many defeats, especially in Lebanon, Palestine, Syria and Yemen.

The links between South Africa and Israel have been extensively documented. The two states have the same origin: Southern Africa was organized by diamond magnate, Cecil Rhodes – the theoretician of “German imperialism” [1] – while Israel was borne by a disciple of Rhodes, Theodor Herzl, who followed in all respects the Rhodesian model. In 2002, Queen Elizabeth censored publication of correspondence between Rhodes and Herzl, which is only known through the letter reproduced by the latter in one of his works.

The links between the Cuban Revolution and the Islamic Revolution are tenuous. Certainly, Ali Shariati, the thinker who prepared the Iranian revolution, was Che Guevara’s translator into Persian. But never have the two States arranged significant political links. I was surprised to find their mutual ignorance by talking with the respective leaders. It is true that there are cultural differences that make contacts difficult: Cuban society is highly sexually permissive, while Iranian society (well before the Islamic Revolution) is, on the contrary, ultra-protective in this field.

Two revolutionary States

It is clear that the interests of the United States on the one hand, and Cuba and Iran on the other hand, are and will remain irreconcilable. There can be no compromise between imperialism and nationalism. However, this does not preclude the conclusion of a regional cease-fire. Also, the resumption of diplomatic relations does not mean the complete lifting of “economic sieges” which Washington calls “sanctions”, as if they were always punishments decided by the Security Council.

Currently, Cuba is considered to be a dictatorship by the European left, however the island is recognized by the Latin American left as an example of resistance. Fidel Castro has an aura of liberating and exerts an attraction on the entire continent.

Identically, the Islamic Republic of Iran is considered a mediaeval regime by the European left, while it is the essential ally of any resistance movement in the “Broader Middle East”. However, though Ahmadinejad enjoyed wide popularity, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is less known abroad.

In both cases, these states were victims of their image. Thus Cuba is called “communist”, but Fidel Castro was not until his victory. It was his brother Raúl who was active in the Communist Party. Similarly Che Guevara was opposed to the Soviet economic model and wrote about it before resigning from his post as Minister of Industry, and then leaving to fight alongside Laurent-Désirée Kabila in Congo.

Iran having proclaimed itself an Islamic Republic, it generally understood to be Muslim. But Ali Shariati assured that Islam is a revolutionary process and that all the revolutionaries of the world are Muslims, from the moment they fight for justice. Moreover, Shiite Iran also intervened in Africa and supported … the Christian, Laurent Christian Desiree Kabila, when he came to power.

In both cases, history will remember that these were revolutionary states. But revolutions, as they occur and when they manage to emancipate men, are approved of only when they are finished and no longer threaten any privileges.

Washington’s strategy

For the United States, there was both urgency and opportunity to suspend their conflicts with Cuban and Iranian Resistance. The US reinvestment in Latin America and the movement of US troops from the “Greater Middle East” to the Far East was blocked. In addition, a solution had to be put in place before the Summit of the Americas. Indeed, under the leadership of Rafael Correa, Panama hosting the Summit invited Cuba, for the first time. Barack Obama would therefore meet his adversary, Raúl Castro. Similarly, the United States cannot hope to create three independent states in Iraq without Iranian acquiescence.

Final note: the cease-fire with Washington is particularly dangerous. The United States will not stop trying to destabilize these revolutionary states, but they will now do it with inside access. Neither Cuba nor Iran will now be able to monitor the many Americans who come for business or tourism. The CIA will not fail in the next two years to try colored revolutions.

In this, the resumption of diplomatic relations between Washington and Havana prefigures that between Washington and Tehran.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Roger Lagassé

[1] Rhodes spoke of “German imperialism” to describe the British Empire. The sovereigns of the United Kingdom are in effect Germanic.

Source: http://www.voltairenet.org/article186256.html – Article licensed under Creative Commons – The articles on Voltaire Network may be freely reproduced provided the source is cited, their integrity is respected and they are not used for commercial purposes (license CC BY-NC-ND).

DISCLAIMER

More articles and videos from CanadaNewsLibre HERE !

CreativeCommons_CNLib_3_0CanadaNewsLibre 2015

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s