MONOKULTUR

Der synes at være to skoler, der ser på den ‘fredsproces’, der over de næste 60 dage skal forhandles mellem USA og Iran. Den ene, og helt dominerende, ser på ordlyden i den skriftlige aftale, der er udgangspunktet for en endelig fred. Her fokuserer kritikerne, som er alle inden for denne skole, på, at USA ser ud til at tilbyde Iran, altså det iranske regime, meget mere end den aftale, som de allerede havde indgået under tidligere præsident Obama.

Den anden skole påpeger at alt der tilbydes er betinget af reelle resultater, modsat den tidligere, der var baseret på tro og love. Desuden er det iranske regimes tilstand væsensforskellig fra før den væbnede del af konflikten. Iran står tilbage uden flåde, luftvåben og forsvar, atomprogram og måske uden en klar ledelse – kan den i længden overhovedet hævde sig legitim? Desuden står de nu uden venner både i Mellemøsten og globalt.

“Did we sign a deal because the new Ayatollah is gay and we wanted to focus on pride month?” var spørgsmålet som Greg Gutfeld stillede den amerikanske vicepræsident J D Vance. 

The reason we signed this deal is because Donald Trump did exactly what he came to do. He destroyed their nuclear program. He opened the Straight of Hormuz. And now we have ‘nice Trump’. 

You can have ‘mean Trump’ or you can have ‘nice Trump’. And what he said to the Iranians is that because we came what we’re determined to do, we’re gonna outstretched our hand and say that if you guys are going to behave we’re gonna actually make you a successful country. 

And if you don’t behave you’re not going to get anything. And you are never going to have this opportunity again. It’s a classic Trump bargain. He gives these guys a choice, make the right choice, make the wrong choice, frankly it doesn’t matter to the United States of America.

Nemlig, men det betyder noget for resten af verden, der stadig er afhængig af Hormuz Strædets olie leverancer. Nu er strædet blevet resten af verdens problem. “The Obama deal was terrible” fortæller James S. Robbins, Dean of The Institute of World Politics, Bill O’Reilly.

It didn’t constrain them from anything, it gave them all kinds of unlimited money, which they then used to fund their terrorist proxies. And ultimately Sun setted it and basically gave Iran a timeline for developing a nuclear weapon.

So I think the president’s critique of the JCPOA was right on target. So it’s too soon to compare this to the JCOPA because, again, this is just the MOU, it’s the framework of the negotiations

“Part of the Art of the Deal is to walk away from the table!” minder Robbins om. Bill O’Rilley bemærker

Trump used his speech to praise China. He said that China could have helped iran and didn’t, with Stinger missiles and other things. He went out of his way, he even gave Putin a little shoutout, which Putin doesn’t deserve, but Xi did. Xi could have caused and amazing amount of trouble there by arming Iran against tun USA and Israel. So Trump used his speech for a lot more than just a memorandum

Robbins er enig og tilføjer 

And if you look at the MOU, the final point says that whatever comes out of the 60 days – and I agree with you, it’s not going to be 60 days, it’s going to probably take a lot longer – but whatever comes out of that process has to be confirmed by the UN Council. And essentially that gives China and Russia a veto over whatever comes out of this process, if they choose to veto.

So the fact that the president went out of his way to praise China and give a little nod to Russia I think is looking forward to the fact that at the end of the day, those two countries are going have to vote for whatever comes out of this process. 

De fleste kritikere af Trump overser konstant at USA er en supermagt, hvilket gør deres interesser globale. Mens europæerne fokuserer på alting Ukraine, som venstrefløjen ser alting Gaza og Gretha, tænker Trump på både gynger og karruseller, hele cirkusset.

De 60 dages forhandling kan hele tiden startes forfra, så Trump og Republikanerne ikke står i en større krig under midtvejsvalget. Det gælder om at holde konflikten under simre punktet.

Den Republikanske senator Lindsey Graham tror ligeledes den diplomatiske løsning “is gonna fail” og betror Face The Nation følgende indsigt

I spent 4.5 hours with President Trump on Friday. Here’s what I think will happen next. If this deal fails, President Trump is gonna take the Strait of Hormuz over by force. We’ll charge a fee for all those who go through to pay for the operation. 

And we’re going to expand on the Abraham Accords in the calendar year of 2026. We’re going to get Saudi Arabia to join the Abraham Accords and we’re just the biggest change in 5.000 years in the Midddle East.

And if Iran contests the control of Hormuz by the United States we’ll obliterate them. So to all the people listening: If this diplomatic effort fails, President Trump is going to take the Straight of Hormuz, we’re gonna run it, we’re gonna try to get Saudi Arabia to join the Abraham Accords and end the Arab-Israeli conflict in 2026. And if Iran continues to attack Israel and Lebanon, the new policy will be, we’ll hit Iran. 

So to the Iranians, if you’re listening; when you use Hezbollah to attack Israel, I think the new policy will be, we’ll attack Iran!

“I think a lot of people are missing a couple of premises” siger Victor Davis Hanson herunder, og at de “keeps thinking that this is the Obama deal when Iran was ascendant, convinced that Obama wouldn’t lift a finger militarily, and they had all that infrastructure”

Number one, we don’t know the extent of damage in Iran. No ground troops, no embedded reporters, no news, no internet there. Trump’s said a trillion dollars or two trillion, maybe even if it’s a half trillion, it’s a fifty year investment in military nuclear industrial complex, and a lot of it is ruined. 

And they have been embargoed, and they’ve been sanctioned, their assets are frozen. They are losing four hundred millions of dollars a day in revenue. So they are in bad shape. We don’t know how bad they are. That’s number one.

Number two, Iran is not a protectorate of the United States. It’s ninety million people, it’s one and a half times the size of Texas. And we don’t have a good record of going in on the ground and manage a country. We saw that in Afghanistan. We saw that in Iraq. Seventy-five hundred dead, two trillion dollars, and look at it: the Taliban is still in control. So we are not gonna go in there and manage it.

And if you’re not going to go in there and manage it, then your control over that regime is limited. Especially when it has patrons that are nuclear like Russia and China. And they want to get back in. So my point is simply this: Can you stop them from enriching? 

Yes! You can say we’re going to bomb the moment we see you tamper with Pickaxe Mountain or any of those areas. And can we stop them from closing the strait? 

Yes! You have to open the strait or we’re not going to lift the blockade.

Hanson slår fast at Trump “doesn’t have some crazy idea that he is going to champion a shia alternate crescent to rival the moderate arab regimes and Israel and then empower Damascus, Tehran, Gaza, Beirut” som Obama gjorde, rådgivet som han var, af folk som Valerie Jarrett og Ben Rhodes. 

The key to all this memorandum of understanding is; will he use force when they inevitably cheats? So a week from now, if they think, “Well, we got a lot of concessions, we’re gonna send three missiles into the hated UAE and we’re gonna send a couple more into Kuwait and have a big Shia restive population”. And if Trump says “Oh, that was just a love tap” it won’t work.

He’s got to say “Okay, you’ve sent three, you’re going to lose ten bridges. You sent three against Kuwait, you’re gonna lose a power grid”. He hasn’t done that yet.

People forget there’s a whole list of targets that Obama went after in Libya and a whole typology that Clinton went after. We were in the same place in Serbia in 1999. It was not working after 60 days. We limited. And then all of a sudden Clinton went wild: All the bridges gone on the Danube. The grid. He hit museums, he hit hospitals, he hit everything.

Anytime he heard they were using something that he thought he wouldn’t hit, they hit. And that stopped him after seventyeight days.

My point is, they have a whole list of targets that we haven’t even touched. But you can shut down that entire economy in two days if you hit them. You take out two big power plants in Tehran and you’re in trouble. And you take out the power… were is all these missile factories, where are they getting their power? It’s on the grid. 

Intet er afgjort, aftalen skal ratificeres af det iranske parlament. Men heri ligger forskellen. USA er som et vestligt og demokratisk land, pragmatisk i sin selvforståelse. Irans regime er en puristisk dødskult. Den vil have vanskeligheder ved selv på et symbolsk plan, at beslutte noget fornuftigt. Men mens de tænker over det, bliver Hormuz Strædet stadigt mindre afgørende.