US shifts on ...
Page 1
However, the resistance of the Zionist regime’s prime minister against internal pressures and White House requests, and the critical internal conditions of the regime, have convinced Washington that escalating tensions in the Zionist regime’s cabinet, which could lead to unrest and a power vacuum in occupied Palestine, would be more costly for the White House, especially during the US presidential election.
Therefore, the US continues to support Israel’s conditions for a cease-fire through diplomatic shows. The US claims that negotiations for a cease-fire in Gaza are ongoing. The plan currently on the negotiating table for a cease-fire in Gaza is the Biden plan, which involves a six-week halt in fighting, followed by a phased release of prisoners and detainees, with Washington claiming that this will ultimately lead to a definitive cease-fire. However, Netanyahu insists on maintaining Zionist forces in the Philadelphia corridor on the Egypt-Gaza border.
The failure of the US to achieve a cease-fire in Gaza, even a temporary one, could become an electoral challenge, making the issue of a cease-fire in Gaza, whether declared or undeclared, a pressing concern during the US election. The escalation of the war in Ukraine and the shift in focus to Iran, Russia, and their military cooperation, as well as claims of tripartite cooperation between Iran, Russia, and North Korea, could provide a convenient escape route for Washington during the election. Moreover, intensifying pressure on Iran would also satisfy Tel Aviv and make regional security conditions more complex, making it impossible for the US and Israel to accept a cease-fire in Gaza.
In other words, if the Biden administration can win the presidential election without achieving a cease-fire in Gaza and increasing pressure on Iran and the resistance axis, it will pave the way for a joint US-Israeli plan to fully occupy Gaza and establish a Zionist government.
On the other hand, the escalation of the Ukraine war is a double-edged sword that could also provide opportunities for Trump to attack the Democrats. Therefore, the goal is to provoke Moscow into actions that highlight the threat posed by Russia to the West, as this would be more beneficial for the Democrats, given Trump’s past statements in favor of Russia.
Recent provocative actions by the US in Ukraine can be seen in this light. The simultaneous visit of the US and British foreign ministers to Ukraine and promises of increased military support were also provocative, prompting Russian President Vladimir Putin to warn of the consequences.
In reality, it appears that the West is creating another war trap for Russia in Ukraine and Eastern Europe, which could also be used against Iran.
The recent behavioral pattern of the US in exerting more pressure on Tehran, claiming an arms deal between Iran and Russia, can also be analyzed in this context. Meanwhile, increased propaganda against Iran-Russia military cooperation also downplays the questions raised about the poor performance of the Biden administration, with Harris as vice president, in Ukraine.
It is predictable that, following the traditional US pattern of aggressive diplomacy, whether Trump or Harris wins, the US will soon launch a new round of efforts to put Iran as its security concerns. This behavioral pattern, which can also be described as coercive diplomacy, has always been one of the political strategies of the US and its European allies against Iran and Russia, pursued with new techniques at each stage. The sum of these techniques is to create a mental and objective impression of perpetually portraying “Iran as the culprit” and also “Russia as the culprit.”
Specifically, regarding Iran, examining the actions and reactions of the US since its withdrawal from the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) makes this behavioral pattern more understandable. After the US’s unjustified and baseless withdrawal from the JCPOA, while Iran emphasized its commitment to the agreement and experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed Iran’s compliance at various stages, the White House focused on creating new cases, including Iran’s ballistic missile program, in an attempt to portray issues outside the JCPOA as a violation of the spirit of the nuclear agreement. These efforts continued with the change of government in Washington and the transfer of power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden, with the US taking provocative actions against Iran to prompt Tehran to violate the JCPOA. The recent overt pressure by Washington and the European troika on the IAEA to create new doubts about Iran’s compliance with the nuclear agreement is also being pursued in line with this political-security approach.