Connect with us

Middle East

Reason U.S. Stays in Syria Revealed: To Steal Its Oil

Avatar photo

Published

on

Steven Sahiounie is an exceptionally reliable journalist on the Middle East, and is also the Editor-in-Chief of Mideast Discourse. I have never yet found him to have reported even a single false (or inaccurate) statement, and this is remarkable for a journalist on such a heavily propagandized subject-area. He reported on August 17th that:

Maher Ihsan is a journalist and political expert. He exposes the real purpose the US remains in Syria as occupiers. According to Ihsan, the US is stealing resources and imposing its will upon the political future of Syria. “Look at the situation now, the United States is controlling key gas and oil fields in oil-rich areas in Syria, it’s also controlling key agricultural areas … the United States didn’t come here to help, but to take advantage of the situation and impose their own will,” Ihsan said.

Ahmad Al-Ashqar, a journalist and political expert, echoed Ihsan’s views, that the US occupies and plunders the oil-rich regions in Syria.

On August 8, the Syrian oil ministry said in a statement that the average daily output of Syrian oil in the first half of 2022 is 80,300 barrels, while the US occupying forces and their mercenaries are stealing an average of 66,000 barrels a day, accounting for over 83 percent of Syria’s oil output.

According to the ministry, the prolonged crisis in Syria has cost Syria’s oil sector about 105 billion US dollars in direct and indirect losses.

One might say that stealing Syria’s oil is being done in order to impoverish the Syrian people so much so that they will turn against and overthrow Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, whom even Western-sponsored polls, which have been taken for years in Syria, have shown to be overwhelmingly the #1 person whom they want to be Syria’s President. However, whatever the reason might be as to why the U.S. regime is stealing Syria’s oil, the U.S. regime’s theft is equally illegal, and equally a gangster-operation that it is running there.

This operation has been going on for a decade now, under American Presidents Obama, Trump, and, currently, Biden.

Sahiounie’s report asserts that “President Trump ordered the withdrawal of US troops from Syria in December 2018, but the Pentagon would not agree with the order, and the US troops remain in two locations: one in the oil-rich north east region, and the other in the south east at Al-Tanf.” His source on that might have been U.S. news reports on 19 December 2018, such as “Trump orders rapid withdrawal from Syria in apparent reversal”; but, obviously, it turned out to have been false (like most U.S. news reports about international relations are).

On 9 August 2022, U.S. Colonel Douglas Macgregor discussed this matter in depth in a youtube interview. Two excerpts from it will be shown here. The first excerpt will provide background regarding America’s Military Industrial Complex or “MIC,” in order to explain the second excerpt; the second excerpt will be Macgregor’s historical account of how, when Macgregor personally finally drafted a U.S. withdrawal-order for the President to sign, which was limited ONLY to Afghanistan though Macgregor had tried to get Trump to approve U.S. withdrawals from also Iraq and Syria, Trump actually did sign it but refused to follow-through on it, and simply caved to the uniform opposition against his Constitutional command that came from both of the Parties in Congress, and despite the Commander-in-Chief’s having the sole authority to do this and the Congress having no authority against that order — Trump just didn’t care enough about the matter: (youtube)

The truth is, the armed forces, especially the Army, the Marines, really exists in order to provide jobs for generals. So, you have this enormous bureaucracy that has built up over time. Today, we have, in the United States armed forces, 40 four-star generals and admirals. Now, to those who don’t understand what this means, in World War II, when we had 12.2 million men under arms fighting all over the world [and before President Truman created the U.S. ‘Defense’ Department in 1947], at the height of that war until the war was nearly over, we had only seven four-stars. Today, we have 1.1 million under arms, and we have forty. Now, anyone who knows anything about the military knows that this kind of overhead is corrupting, it’s unnecessary, it constipates and slows down decision-making, it makes for bad policy. So, I think, in this sense, we’re banana-republic-like, and we have lots and lots of people running around as generals wearing lots and lots of medals, none of which have anything to do with fighting anybody under fire or killing anybody or being valorous, but having to do with, like, I was in the theater when this happened, and I was here when this happened, and my fellow generals rewarded me with more decorations. It’s embarrassing; this is a terrible mess that needs to be addressed. [That excerpt ends at

(youtube)

[Questioner asks: Let me take you back to just a year or two ago. Did President Trump order the Pentagon to return a substantial number of our troops then in Afghanistan, and did the Pentagon, by hook or by crook, decline to comply with that order?] [ANSWER:] What happened was as follows: The President, as you know, had first made an attempt in 2017 to extricate our forces from Afghanistan. He convened a meeting in the White House in the summer in July. All of the great men of defense were there, Mattis, his National Security Adviser at the time McMaster, other senior military people, advisors, cabinet, and the President said I think we’ve been there long enough, we are not accomplishing anything, and I think we should get out. And the entire group stood up and obstructed his wishes, said no you can’t leave, the world as we know it will end, we will have sacrificed and we will have gained nothing, and he said we’ve already got nothing. What are we getting for it? How do we benefit from doing this? Why are we there? Why aren’t the regional actors involved? Of course, nobody wanted to hear that, so he gave up. He tried again a couple of times, and then finally, I was called to the White House, this would have been the 9th of November, and told that they had removed the Secretary of Defense and they were appointing a new temporary Secretary [This was right after the Biden-Trump election.] He had fired Esper, Esper was always in lockstep with Milley [Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff], who was always running the show anyway. … They wanted no end to the conflict. And you had Mitch McConnell and everyone else on the Hill on the right, and most of the people on the left, who all were 100% onboard with keeping this conflict going and maintaining a presence there in perpetuity. And I was called in and I was asked to arrange a meeting with the new Secretary and John McIntee [Director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office] with a list of tasks for me to perform as the Senior Advisor to the new Secretary of Defense, and I said there’s only one man who can withdraw forces from Afghanistan, and that’s the Secretary of Defense. So I went back and I told the Secretary of Defense the next day, and I said … perhaps [numbers] 1 or 2 on this list [namely] specifically Afghanistan, we could make that happen. We could conceivably also remove forces from Syria and Iraq, that’s relatively easy, you could drive out quickly, but I said beyond that, I don’t think we could do that. And he agreed. And I said, by the way, Mr. Secretary, I don’t think you could do this without a direct order from the President, that’s written. You’re an Acting Secretary. And he said I think you’re right. And I said I’ll get you an order. And so I left, and I called over to the White House, and we had discussed this the night before, and I said we’ve got to have an order. And they said what does the order have to say? And I drafted it, right then and there over the phone, gave them instructions. And I said let me know if you need anything else. A few hours later, about five in the afternoon, I get a frantic call from one of the NSC staffers, asking what are the legal authorities? And I said go and get a Presidential Decision Memorandum out of the file cabinet. His authorities under the Constitution [are there]. And, in addition to that, it will help you with distribution, show you who needs to receive the order. So, he said, okay, got it, thanks so much. I never heard anything again, until Thursday afternoon [12 November 2020] and I was told that … the President had signed the order. I had hoped that we would get a draft, I had asked them to send a draft before it went final but it all took off on its own, [they had] changed some of the dates but essentially it said that everything is going to be out by 15 January. And keep in mind that pulling out of Afghanistan in the winter was always a very good idea because in the winter all of the people who might otherwise interfere with you are up in the mountains, next to stones in their caves. They’re not wandering around in the open. It’s the low ebb in the so-called fighting-season. … Well, unfortunately, what happened was that he wrote this 15 January deadline, somebody [immediately] bootlegged [it] over to the Senate, and I guess Mitch McConnell went berserk, [saying] we can’t just leave, this is impossible, and subsequently Milley gets ahold of this, [and says] this cannot happen!, We are not leaving Afghanistan!! And there was a big pow-wow in the White House and all the principals were there, and the President backed down. [That excerpt ends at

——

Biden came into the White House on 20 January 2021, and set a 1 May 2021 deadline, which was just about the worst season to do it, but the very worst time to do it was when the U.S. regime actually did it, which was 6 July 2021. The problem with America’s Government isn’t only that it is evil (such as by stealing Syria’s oil) but that it is also incompetent — in every way except serving the desires of America’s billionaires in both of its political Parties.

I think that if Douglas Macgregor won’t become America’s President on 20 January 2025, then either something is wrong with Douglas Macgregor (since no current member of Congress nor state Governor is up to the challenge that he clearly has already met — he therefore must now fulfill his unique duty to his nation (just as Lincoln and FDR did), or something is catastrophically wrong with America (since Americans have been keep getting evil and incompetent Presidents such as Bush, Obama, Trump, and now Biden), or else both will be true, and a WW III, global nuclear annihilation, will therefore be likely. That wouldn’t just be stupidity; it would be unimaginably evil, because totally unnecessary global destruction. That’s where things are heading. It’s why he is needed.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse's new book, AMERICA'S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler's Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world's wealth by control of not only their 'news' media but the social 'sciences' — duping the public.

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

Saudi crown prince shifts into high gear on multiple fronts

Avatar photo

Published

on

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is simultaneously speed dating and playing on multiple diplomatic, religious, and economic chessboards.

The latest feather in his crown, his appointment as prime minister, aims to ensure that he can continue to do so with as little collateral damage as possible.

The appointment shields him from legal proceedings in the United States, France, and potentially elsewhere, including the International Criminal Court in the Hague, in which plaintiffs assert that Mr. Bin Salman was responsible for the 2018 killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

As a head of government, Mr. Bin Salman enjoys sovereign immunity, a status he could not claim as heir-apparent.

While the legal manoeuvre is certain to succeed, it is unlikely to significantly improve his image tarnished by the killing and his domestic crackdown on dissent that in recent weeks produced outlandish sentences to decades in prison for little more than a tweet.

Reputational issues have not stopped Mr. Bin Salman from shifting into high gear as he pushes ahead with efforts to diversify Saudi Arabia’s oil-dependent economy; replace regional competitors like the United Arab Emirates and Qatar as the center of gravity at the intersection of Asia, Africa, and Europe; demonstrate his diplomatic clout and relevance beyond oil to the international community; and position himself and the kingdom as the beacon of a moderate, albeit an autocratic, form of Islam.

Mr. Bin Salman’s multi-pronged dash has produced mixed results.

In his latest foray onto the international stage, Mr. Bin Salman sought to display his diplomatic skills and relevance to the international community by securing the release by Russia of ten foreign nationals captured while fighting for Ukraine. The foreigners’ release was part of a Ukrainian-Russian prisoner swap negotiated by Turkey.

Although Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan al Saud rejected as “very cynical” assertions that Mr. Bin Salman was seeking to shore up his image by associating himself with the swap, it seems likely that Russian President Vladimir Putin was happy to give him a helping hand.

In a similar vein, people close to Mr. Bin Salman see mileage in asserting that the crown prince’s lifting of a ban on women’s driving and enhancement of women’s rights and professional opportunities is what inspired women-led protests in Iran that have entered their third week as well as Iran’s recent relaxing of its prohibition on women attending men’s soccer matches.

Ali Shihabi, an analyst who often echoes official Saudi thinking, claimed in a tweet that “Saudi reforms for women have had a big impact on the world of Islam. As the previous upholder of ultra orthodoxy #MBS’s dramatic changes have sent a powerful signal that has undermined Uber conservatives across the region like the Mullahs in Iran.” Mr. Shihabi was referring to Mr. Bin Salman by his initials.

The nationwide protests were sparked by the death of a young woman while in the custody of Iran’s morality police. The police had arrested 22-year-old Mahsa Amini for what authorities described as sporting an “improper” hijab.

By contrast, Mr. Bin Salman’s economic diversification efforts appear to be producing more unambiguous results. For example, the Saudi industry and mineral resources ministry issued over 500 industrial licenses in the first six months of this year, primarily in the food, steel, and chemicals sectors.

The ministry reported that the number of factories that commenced operations doubled, from 303 to 721. Buoyed by massive oil export revenues, Mr. Bin Salman hopes to brand a ‘Made in Saudi’ label as part of his non-oil export drive.

Even so, foreign investment in manufacturing has been slow to take off, particularly in Mr. Bin Salman’s, at times, futuristic mega projects like his US$500 billion city of Neom on the Red Sea. New Jersey-based Lucid Group broke the mold when it announced in February that it would build its first overseas electrical vehicle production facility in the kingdom.

More controversial are plans for a beach in Neom scheduled to open next year that envision a wine bar, a separate cocktail bar, and a bar for “champagne and desserts” in a country that bans alcohol.

The plans seem out of sync with religious sentiment among a significant segment of Gulf youth if a recent opinion poll is to be believed,

Forty-one per cent of young Gulf Arabs, including Saudis, said religion was the most important element of their identity, with nationality, family and/or tribe, Arab heritage, and gender lagging far behind.

More than half of those surveyed, 56 per cent, said their country’s legal system should be based on the Shariah or Islamic law. Seventy per cent expressed concern about the loss of traditional values and culture.

In contrast to economics, the going in turning the kingdom into a sports and esports hub has been rougher.

In his latest move, Mr. Bin Salman launched a US$38 billion “National Gaming and Esports Strategy” to make Saudi Arabia an esports leader by 2030. The budget includes US$13 billion for the acquisition of “a leading game publisher.” The kingdom has already invested in Capcom, Nexon, Nintendo, ESL Gaming, SNK, and Embracer Group.

In addition, Saudi music entertainment company MDLBEAST saw a business opportunity in the 2022 Qatar World Cup that would also help project the once secretive kingdom as a forward-looking modern state. MDLBEAST has invited  56 top international and regional performers to entertain soccer fans on a custom-built stage in Doha during the 28 days of the tournament.

On an even grander scale, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, two of the world’s more notorious human rights violators, together with Greece, are considering bidding to host the 2030 World Cup –a move that sounds like an invitation to a perfect public relations fiasco, if Qatar’s experience is an indicator.

The potential bid did not stop soccer icon Cristiano Ronaldo from dashing initial Saudi hopes to attract a superstar to the kingdom’s top football league when he turned down a US$258 million offer to play for Al Hilal, one of Saudi Arabia’s top clubs.

Similarly, Saudi Arabia’s endeavour to bankroll Liv Golf, a challenger to PGA Tour, the organizer of North America’s main professional men’s golf tournaments, has turned into a public relations fiasco amid allegations that the kingdom was seeking to launder its reputation.

A refusal by major broadcasters to secure the rights to air the League’s tours exemplifies its problems.

Religion has proven to be the arena in which Saudi Arabia may have scored its most prominent public relations fete.

The Muslim World League, Mr. Bin Salman’s primary vehicle to garner religious soft power and propagate an autocratic version of Islam that is socially liberal but demands absolute obedience to the ruler, achieved a public relations coup when it forged an unlikely alliance with Nahdlatul Ulama. Nahdlatul Ulama.

Nahdlatul Ulama is arguably the world’s only mass movement propagating a genuinely moderate and pluralistic form of Islam.

Moreover, as the world’s largest Muslim civil society movement in the world’s most populous Muslim-majority country and democracy, Nahdlatul Ulama’s words and actions have an impact.

As a result, the League counted its blessings when Nahdlatul Ulama’ recognised it as a non-governmental organization rather than a de facto extension of Mr. Bin Salman’s rule.

The recognition opens doors for the League, which has so far traded on Saudi Arabia’s custodianship of Mecca and Medina, Islam’s two holiest cities; lofty statements and conferences that produced little, if any, real change; and funding of emergency and development aid in various parts of the world.

It allowed Nahdlatul Ulama to invite the League, a major promoter of Saudi ultra-conservatism before Mr. Bin Salman’s rise, to co-organize the newly established Religion 20 (R20), a summit of religious leaders under the auspices of the Group of 20 that brings together the world’s largest economies.

The first R20 summit, scheduled for early November in Bali, is part of the run-up to the meeting of G20 leaders later that month hosted by Indonesia, the group’s chairman for the year. The R20, the G20’s latest official engagement group, aims to “position religion as a source of solutions rather than problems across the globe.”

The limits of Saudi tolerance were evident last month when authorities arrested a pilgrim to Mecca for dedicating his pilgrimage to Britain’s Queen Elizabeth, a non-Muslim who had just died.

Nahdlatul’s outreach to the League is part of a bold and risky strategy. However, Nahdlatul Ulama believes that engagement creates an opportunity to persuade the League to embrace a more genuine and holistic vision of moderate Islam rather than one that is self-serving.

That may be a long shot, but it also may be a way of launching Saudi Arabia on a path that would help it repair its badly tarnished image. That is if Mr. Bin Salman pairs genuine religious moderation and pluralism with a rollback of domestic repression and greater political pluralism. So far, that appears to be one thing the crown prince is unwilling to consider.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Iraq and the ‘Blind Gordian Knot’

Avatar photo

Published

on

After its occupation by the United States in 2003, Iraq fell into the double trap of the United States and Iran and became an insoluble problem. Similar to the legendary ‘Gordian’ knot, which Gordias, the king of Phrygia, tied so tightly that it was said that no one could untie it; Until ‘Alexander the Great’ came and cut it in half with one stroke of the sword and the knot was opened.

The trap that America set for Iraq was the constitution that it drafted for this country after the occupation. In this constitution, America removed Iraq’s Arab identity and imposed a two-thirds majority to elect the president, paving the way for the use of a ‘suspended one-third’.

At the same time, he set the conditions for amending this article and all the articles of the first chapter of the constitution so difficult that it was practically impossible to amend it. This constitution divided the power between Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds, as a result of which, the Iraqi society was subject to chaos and fragmentation, and the army that was created based on it collapsed in front of ISIS in Mosul. Now let’s skip the destructive role that Nouri al-Maliki had as the prime minister in this story.

But the trap that the Islamic Republic of Iran set for Iraq was that it formed armed groups affiliated with the Quds Force and gave them legitimacy under the umbrella of ‘The Popular Mobilization Forces, which resulted in the monopoly of power in the hands of the Shiites.

So far, all efforts to free Iraq from this double trap have failed. The popular revolution of 2019 in Baghdad, Karbala, and other southern cities did not reach anywhere with its anti-Iranian slogans, nor did the government of Mustafa al-Kazemi solve the problem with its patriotic government project, nor did the recent efforts of the Sadr movement under the leadership of prominent cleric Moqtada Sadr bear fruit.

The Sadr movement, which won the majority in the elections, tried to form a national majority government in an agreement with the coalition of the Sunni ruling party and the Kurdistan Democratic Party, but the coordination framework was dependent on Iran, using the one-third weapon, defeated the efforts of the Sadr movement.

In Iraq, there is no ‘Alexander the Great’ who will rise up and open the blind Gordian knot with one stroke of the sword and save Iraq from the crisis. No random event occurs. Now, the land between the two rivers is caught in deep-rooted and growing corruption and has lost its way among various Arab, Iranian, Eastern, and Western trends. Even Moqtada’s plan for the formation of a national government, which was put forward recently with the slogan ‘Neither East, nor West”, is also facing many difficulties and obstacles.

Of course, expecting the formation of a democratic system with the management of armed sectarian parties that advance politics based on religious fatwas and the force of destructive war missiles and drones is a futile thing, and talking about a national government in which power is in the hands of religious parties affiliated with the neighboring religious government is gossip and superstition.

Apart from that, according to the current laws of Iraq, the main power is in the hands of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers, and the powers of the President are limited and few, as a result, Shiite parties and organizations, especially their larger organizations, get more privileges, and the main power is exclusive to the Shiite community.

In addition, the organization that will be called the largest and the majority based on the political Ijtihad of the Supreme Court of Iraq will actually be the same organization that the Islamic Republic of Iran creates within the Iraqi parliament, not the organization that will receive the most votes in the elections. As we saw in the last parliamentary elections, the Sadr movement won the majority of votes and tried to form a majority government in an agreement with the Sunni ruling coalition and the Kurdistan Democratic Party, but the groups affiliated with the Islamic Republic of Iran stood against it under the name of the coordination framework. And they made his efforts fruitless.

It is for this reason that it has been almost a year since the Iraqi parliamentary elections were held, but the parliament has so far been unable to form a government and elect a new president.

Of course, this is the nature of totalitarian systems. Although the Iraqi system is a democratic system according to the constitution, in reality, the ruling system in Iraq is a totalitarian system. Just like the ruling systems in the Soviet Union and China, where power rotates among the leaders of the Communist Party; Both the rulers were members of the Communist Party, and the political opponents were imprisoned or executed. Because in Iraq, all the pillars of political power are in the hands of the Shiites; Both the factions that are actually in power are the Shiites, and the factions that lead political struggles and protests as opponents are Shia parties. Even the revolution of 2019 was actually a revolution of the new generation of Shiites who had risen against the influence of Iran and America and their supporters.

The fact is that with this situation, Iraq will never be able to free itself from the American-Iranian double trap and untie the blind Gordian knot. Rather, it can only do so when all the Iraqi national and patriotic parties and groups come together under the umbrella of a democratic, national, independent, non-sectarian coalition that is not dependent on foreign countries, and form a strong national government that, while being independent, is in touch with the outside world and establish good relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran, Arab countries, and Eastern and Western countries.

The bottom line is, when the minds that have produced destructive thoughts cannot produce liberating thoughts, Iraq needs those thinkers and new political figures who will establish a correct, solid, and independent political system in Iraq. The current situation is rooted in the incorrect political structure, the foundation of which was laid in 2003. But it is a pity that only a clear understanding of the crisis is not enough to solve it.

Continue Reading

Middle East

The end of political Islam in Iran

Avatar photo

Published

on

Nothing in Iran will be the same again. The uprising of the majority of big and small cities in Iran after the killing of Mahsa Amini by the “Morality Police” of the Islamic Republic of Iran has a new social structure. Because in the contemporary history of Iran, we have not witnessed such social forces that have been strongly influenced by the women’s movement.

The social structure of the uprising

During the era of Reza Shah Pahlavi, women were allowed to study in law and medical schools, or during the era of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, women were organized to implement the White Revolution ideology as soldiers. This means that at that time, women were “allowed” and “organized”, but all these freedoms were given to women based on men’s power, state power, and non-democratic methods, and the women’s movement did not play an active role in these actions. For this reason, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi said in one of his interviews: Women are schemes and evil, women have not even had first-class scientists throughout history, women may be equal to men before the law but they have not had the same abilities as men. They are not, women have not even produced a Michelangelo, Johann Sebastian Bach, or a good cook. It was not only Mohammad Reza Shah who had a misogynist view, but Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, was against giving women the right to vote and considered the entry of women into the National Assembly, municipality, and administrations as a cause of paralysis in the affairs of the country and government. In a letter to Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, he requested the abolition of women’s right to vote.

It can be said that the Iranian revolution (1979) was one of the biggest revolutionary movements that was completely “made“ by a mass social movement in the history of the 20th century, and women played a very active and prominent role in it. But the women in that revolutionary movement not only for themselves and the issues of women’s rights but under the framework of Islamic and communist parties and groups such as the Tudeh Party of Iran, Organization of Iranian People’s Fedai Guerrillas, People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran, and Muslim People’s Republic Party tried to solve the problems of Iranian women. That is, in that mass revolutionary movement, various communist, Islamic and guerilla ideologies were higher, more important, and more preferable than the women themselves, and women tried to find their answers with the help of these revolutionary ideologies to solve the general problems of the country and women’s issues.

But in recent developments, women have not been “allowed” through the reforms of the Pahlavi government, nor have they been “organized” through the ideologies of the revolutionary parties before and after the victory of the Iranian revolution. Rather, in the strict sense of the word, they have become the locomotive of the revolutionary upsurge of contemporary Iran and have given “allowed” and “organization” to other social and ethnic forces in the geography of Iran. From now on, women in Iran are the creators of social and revolutionary changes based on the women’s movement.

Discourse analysis of the uprising

After the June 2009 presidential election and the protest against election fraud, large protests started in other cities, especially in Tehran. In that rebellion, we witnessed the loss of the unity of the elites, the crisis of legitimacy, and the crisis of the efficiency of the Islamic Republic regime. After those protests, the Shiite Islamist ideology of the Islamic Republic faced illegitimacy and the unity of the elites of the ruling class was lost. On the other hand, the government faced a crisis of inefficiency after those incidents and could not meet the crisis economic, cultural, political, and civil liberties, and women’s demands. Therefore, in the demonstrations of 2018, tens of thousands of people rose up against economic policies, high prices, and unemployment, and with the spread of these protests, the ideological foundations and legitimacy of the regime were protested by the demonstrators. With a 50% increase in the price of gasoline in 2019 and a 35% inflation, unemployment and an increase in the price of basic goods and food, a new wave of protests in many cities of Iran faced the government of Hassan Rouhani with a major social and economic crisis. In those protests, women played an active role and chanted against the mandatory hijab.

Contrary to all these widespread protests and social riots in Iran’s contemporary history, in the recent revolutionary uprising, the cause of the uprising is the murder of Mahsa Amini, the defense of women’s rights, and opposition to the mandatory hijab. The overwhelming majority of Iranian women have declared their separation with the slogan of “women, life, freedom” from the movement of reformers, monarchists of the Pahlavi regime, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran, fundamentalists of the Islamic Republic, utopias and communist, Islamist, totalitarian, anti-woman, and false ideologies.

It is very important in the recent revolutionary uprising, the cooperation of Turks men and women in the cities of Iran with the protests. Because the Turk social-political movement did not declare solidarity with the protesters of other cities of Iran due to the neglect of the right to education in the mother tongue, the right to self-determination, and the realization of economic, political, cultural, and environmental rights in the uprisings of 2009, 2018 and 2019. The slogan of “freedom, justice, and national government” of the Turks of different cities of Iran, also shows the existence of different and yet common demands of the majority of ethnic groups living in Iran.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Reports37 mins ago

Ten years of Afghan economic growth, reversed in just 12 months

A year on from the Taliban takeover in Kabul, Afghanistan is gripped by “cascading crises”, including a crippled economy that...

Religion3 hours ago

Betting on the wrong horse: The battle to define moderate Islam

Proponents of a moderate Islam that embraces tolerance, diversity, and pluralism may be betting on the wrong horse by supporting...

Defense4 hours ago

Ukraine Joins NATO: Assessing Future Disasters

News related to the Russo-Ukrainian war is still for public consumption and scholar nowdays.  As  chess game, Russia-Ukraine are in...

Europe6 hours ago

European Union Trucks Banned From Entering Russia

In a reciprocal step, an executive order banning European Union haulage trucks crossing borders into Russia’s territory aggravates economic situation...

Economy9 hours ago

Baltic reality: High inflation and declining of living standards

The Baltic States’ economy is in bad condition. The latest estimate from the EU’s statistics body shows that Eurozone inflation...

Europe11 hours ago

For A New Foreign Policy in Italy

The sad and notorious vicissitudes of the non-existence of an Italian foreign policy have hit rock bottom over the last...

Intelligence17 hours ago

Who Masterminded the Suicide Attack on Hazara Students’ Educational Center Kaj in Kabul?

According to explicit intelligence information, last Friday, September 30, 2022, a suicide attack on Hazara students in an educational center...

Trending