US and its Allies are all about the oil and gas resources in Islamic Republic of Iran

Of especial interest to the USG and allies are the oil and gas resources of the Islamic Republic of Iran
16 June, 2013 – Namavaran Network

Dr. Colin S. Cavell Born and raised in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Dr. Cavell is an American author who earned his Doctorate of Philosophy degree in Political Science from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Dr. Cavell is currently Assistant Professor of Political Science at Bluefield State College in Bluefield, West Virginia and Adjunct Professor of Political Science at Holyoke Community College in Holyoke, Massachusetts. Colin S. Cavell is a member of the American Political Science Association (APSA) and the Massachusetts Community College Council (MCCC).

NNC has conducted a Q & A with him that you can read here:

NNC – “U.S. foreign policy”: What is your assessment?
Dr. Colin S. Cavell – The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Defense Intelligence, and Joint Activities are, in descending order of importance, the structures which garner the primary resources of US tax dollars at present. Currently, the FY2013 defense budget is $472 billion, down from $525 billion prior to the Budget Control Act automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion which commenced on January 2, 2013. Also, this is a reduction from the FY2012 defense budget of $530.6 billion. And, just two years prior, the FY2010 defense budget was $664 billion. So we are witnessing a continuing decline in monies going towards US military activities, and this is primarily due to the extravagant waste on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as due to the lingering effects of the economic collapse of 2008. The ongoing war in Afghanistan and continuing activities in Iraq also now fall under the term “overseas contingency operations” and are included in the defense budget instead of being voted on separately as was previous practice. Consequently, we can see that the severe economic crisis is affecting resources the US Government (USG) can put into its military activities to promote its foreign policies abroad.

The aims of US foreign policy remain the same: protect and, where possible, expand the system of private expropriation of labor under the leadership of American-Anglo capitalists and their privately-run corporate institutions. The state apparatus remains the instrument of this capitalist class and works to perpetuate their interests.

The primary threat to the stability of the American-Anglo capitalist class in the present conjuncture comes from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) reflecting its economic prowess and growing domination of world markets. A second threat emanates from a growing belligerence from a more confident Russia which, since the downfall of the Soviet Union in 1991, has gradually established a relatively stable strong state backed by a more nationalistically-oriented capitalist class which sees its interests as diverging from those of the West. In order to corral and contain these powers—both of which have strong Asian interests–US President Obama is diversifying US military focus from a myopic view and fixation on the Middle East towards a greater emphasis on Asia and the Pacific. To effectuate continued US hegemony over much of the world, however, control of the earth’s remaining fossil fuels, notably oil and natural gas, particularly the large quantities under the sands of the Middle East, will continue to be a primary focus of US foreign policy. All present actions towards Syria, Iran, etc., are structured with this goal in mind.

Of especial interest to the USG and allies are the oil and gas resources of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which have been out of American-Anglo capitalist control since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. These resources are the third largest in the world. Sabotage and destabilization efforts by the US and allies, particularly Israel, will continue against the Iranian Republic and its ally Syria, though it is doubtful that the US will commit its own troops on the ground to wage this fight. US reluctance to commit ground troops to this fight at the present time stems largely from: 1) the knowledge (and resulting bad faith) of most members of Congress that the USG is supporting anti-democratic elements to overthrow, at least technically, democratic governments (i.e. Syria and Iran); and 2) the USG is concerned that if the US commits troops to this struggle, then the American people will find out that it is the US who is supporting jihadist fighters associated with Al Qaeda in an effort to prop up anti-democratic monarchical dictatorial oppressive regimes, including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc. Instead, facilitating jihadist fighters from the Persian Gulf kingdoms and elsewhere to fight in Syria is the option being pursued with the aim to: 1) help defuse the growing economic contradictions and political demands of frustrated Arab and other populations in these US-client states; and 2) push back the Arab Spring of democratic protests that is engulfing the region since 2011. Concern by US ally Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf monarch client states is that the Arab Spring of democratic revolts will embroil their societies into civil war thus threatening their continued autocratic rule. Hence, there is a perceived existential necessity by these dictators to redirect the Arab Spring away from the Persian Gulf kingdoms and onto the secular democratic regime of Syria so as to expose the Islamic Republic of Iran to the full force of Western-backed imperialist invasion. The underlying belief behind these actions is that overthrowing Iran and bringing it back under imperialist control will obviate the need to make any democratic concessions, as calls for greater freedom will, they believe, dissipate once the Iranian Revolution is nullified. However, the attempt to characterize the Syrian government and the Iranian government as less than democratic has no currency outside of the US. Bashar al-Assad was not only put into office through elections in 2000 and 2007 but, as well, a new constitution approved in February of 2012 has wide popular appeal and will allow him to run again in 2014. Likewise, next week, in mid-June, Iran will be undergoing its eleventh presidential election since the founding of the republic. And, while the US may quibble over the structure of these elections and the candidates running or how they are qualified, political observers in the Middle East are well aware that even in the US—in the world’s self-proclaimed “greatest democracy”—only 538 people select the president and vice president, and yet the American people accept the USG as democratic in form. Thus relative to Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf monarchies, Iran and Syria are considered very free countries, and this is particularly the view of most women in the Middle East. And supporting the rights of women are a key component of which governments will accrue support and/or condemnation in the Middle East. In this regard, Syria and Iran are miles ahead of Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf kingdoms.

Thirdly, American-Anglo capitalists are concerned that captive populations in their spheres of control are too democratically oriented as well as distrustful of the continuation of the capitalist state given the continued high levels of unemployment and economic stress these populations are presently experiencing. Indeed, a recent Rasmussen survey reported only a slight majority of Americans still consider capitalism as superior to socialism, and this is a cause of concern for the powers that be. The usual diversionary tactics of appeals to prurient interests and/or mindless absurdities and/or fantastical spectacles (e.g. alleged sightings of mermaids, etc.) have thus been heightened. But such diversionary tactics or prestidigitatious practices cannot substitute for the lack of jobs and financial security for any length of time. Likewise, Americans are sick and tired of endless wars and are no longer as gullible nor susceptible to jingoistic appeals.

NNC – In your opinion, are concepts like “fighting terrorism” and “promoting democracy” merely a cover for the pursuit of US interests or an aspect of reality in America?

Dr. Colin S. Cavell – “Fighting terrorism” and “promoting democracy” are phrases utilized by the USG and opportunistic politicians in order to rally popular opinion to support their actions both domestically and abroad. “Fighting terrorism” plays upon people’s genuine fear of bombings, assassinations, etc. akin to the September 11, 2001, suicide attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, DC. Appeals to self-preservation and ‘fear of the other’ are ingrained in popular culture so as to reinforce belief in the dominant Anglo-American capitalist culture in the US while denigrating the alleged amoral and insidious nature of foreigners, especially those of suspect cultures, e.g. currently those of Middle Eastern descent and Muslim religious confession. “Promoting democracy” is a phrase utilized by US Presidents and other officials, especially those connected with the US State Department, to castigate any regime the US determines to be in the enemy camp. If the USG is waging war against such regimes or countering their moves in the international arena, such actions are said to be carried out in the interest of “promoting democracy”, even if this means supporting autocratic monarchs in the Persian Gulf or dictatorial regimes elsewhere. …more