Given the volatile state of current world affairs, we’ve been fortunate enough to chat with Mike Pompeo, a man who has worked in some of the most powerful positions in US government. Pompeo’s presence in New Hampshire indicates some significant global machinations at play. The question beckons – what, exactly, has brought him back to the Granite State? It appears that his old pals at the World Affairs Council extended an invite a few months back, which he has now accepted, keen to educate locals on the importance of America’s role in global affairs. It seems even the quiet corners of states such as Kansas and New Hampshire have a vested interest in America’s international dealings; or rather, they should, considering the potential ripple effects of global decisions.
The bigger question on everyone’s mind is centered around Iran. Recently, reports indicated a severe blow to Iranian nuclear capabilities. Although the New York Times suggests it may only be a negligible setback, the President is convinced of a complete obliteration. There’s no direct confirmation of the extent of the damage done, but if it merely results in a brief hiatus, was this escalation even necessary? Though political elites may not see it as an escalation, the rest begs to differ.
Interestingly, there seems to be a notion of peace following this aggressive course of action. Apparently, Iran is considerably weakened, putting a massive dent to the expansion of its nuclear program. Yet, we have to ask: at what cost was this ‘victory’ obtained? The sheer projection of force resulting in such arguably positive change – isn’t this simply an alarming manifestation of might is right?
Crippling Iran’s nuclear program undoubtedly rattles the leadership within the nation. As a result, the influence of terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah decreases, thereby reducing their powers and potential threats to world peace. However, isn’t it dangerously presumptuous to brag about these results when the conditions that enable the existence of such entities remain unchanged?
Having said that, there is substantial relief echoing from the White House with the usual America-centric narrative. A narrative that suggests that this aggressive course of action, led by the United States and their allies, sends a clear message that a potential Iranian nuclear program under the governance of the current regime will not be tolerated. But aren’t there also those who wonder whether the bullies have merely changed their tactics, not their targets, in this new ‘world-changing’ era?
But, of course, proponents of this action insist that Iran is now quelled to some extent. Yet, problems persist under the rule of the ever-defiant Ayatollah, pushing his people to continuously develop their arsenal. Furthermore, the reveal of the military’s shortcomings only sparks rising concerns among the citizens while world powers such as Russia and China seemingly refuse assistance in these dire times. Are we to believe this is the much-touted global game-changing event, really?
Unsurprisingly, credit is forcibly given to the former, President Trump – an effort to gloss over his myriad of other potentially catastrophic decisions under the guise of ‘protecting American lives.’ It’s curious how the narrative continues to dally between praising aggressive strategies while undermining peaceful routes.
Then comes the inevitable question: the idea of regime change in Iran. A statement once released but quickly walked back by the White House. Are there those foolish enough to believe that the current cycle of problems with Iran will end while the same leadership remains? The troubling insinuation of regime change sets a dangerous precedent, scarily resonant of the power-hungry narratives that usually accompany Western intervention.
One can’t help but note Pompeo’s personal vendetta against the current regime in Iran, with the assertion that it still poses a threat to his life. He insists that until the regime changes, the nation will continue on its pain-filled path. Yet, isn’t this simply an invocation of the ‘us versus them’ narrative, conveniently sweeping under the rug any consideration of Iran’s position or the prospects for diplomatic resolution?
Pompeo labels the Iranian leadership as a ‘theocratic bunch of thugs,’ responsible for horrific acts against Americans and Israelis. Yet one can’t ignore the irony in this loaded accusation, given America’s extensive history of questionable foreign interventions. Who are the real thugs?
Despite the anti-Iran narrative, the idea of a chastened regime remains on the table – a mere hope of regression. Yet, the history of interventions shows that widespread violence and destruction often follow such hopes. Is the world simply expected to accept the actions of the ‘superpower conferencing table,’ and remain silent?
However, in this global game, it seems you can’t suppress evil entirely, only manage its advances. Doors of opportunity and freedom are somewhat forced open through this strategic maneuvering in the Middle East. So we’re left wondering: have these latest ‘advances’ truly provided more room for peace and prosperity? Or is it simply another well-spun tale to justify expansionist ideologies?
It cannot be ignored that the goal of these diplomatic maneuvers is to prevent American troops from risking their lives in another conflict. Yet, has enough been done to solve the real problems? Or are we simple spectators in an endgame constructed by the upper echelons, expecting to cheer for decisions without regard for actual diplomacy, truth, and human life?
One can only hope that this recent muscular flex against Iran will not merely serve to stoke more fear and enmity. The consequences of these decisions often reverberate much louder than the initial acts. Perhaps it would do leaders like Pompeo some good to remember this
Sadly, the raised curtain on American foreign policy is a testimony to a bleak reality. The bullying tactics, the power plays, the self-importance – they all conjure a grotesque image of global politics. We may have to brace ourselves for the fact that the real message behind these ‘world-changing decisions’ is not about peace or freedom, but rather about domination and control.
The post Biden’s Silence: World Affairs Ignored at Domestic Expense appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
