Regime change in Tehran?


According to the statements of US Secretary of state Tillerson, the USA is working on regime change in Tehran. Official policy is not yet and his words of interpretation. But the nervousness in the middle East is on the rise.

At a hearing in the U.S. house of representatives Tillerson said literally: “The US policy is designed to effect, with reference to elements inside of Iran for a peaceful Transition of government”. The US Secretary of state, had replied to a question of the Republican members Ted Poe. The Texans had decidedly asked if the United States were working towards regime change. Tillerson had sent in advance of his answer, however, is the Iran policy of the Trump-Administration will be developed and had not been submitted to the President. This is also why Ali Fathollah-Nejad warns to see in Tillersons Statements already the clear commitment to regime change. In a DW Interview, the Iran expert at the German society for Foreign policy DGAP, calls for differentiation: “of Course, there are Places in his statements, which point in the direction of regime change. But there are other priorities of a more confrontational American policy towards Iran – which focused primarily on Iran’s regional role,” Fatholla-Nejad.

The memory of 1953 coup

The Iranian government has certainly taken the Ball from Washington and on Thursday, the Statements of Tillersons sharply dismissed as “interventionist and in gross violation of the norms of international Law,” as state Department spokesman Bahram Qassemi said. Iran’s foreign Minister Javar Zarif reminded in a Tweet to the last of the US-initiated regime change in Iran: The 1953 CIA-organized coup against the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh – at the time of the first democratically elected Premier in Western Asia.

Ironically, the US Ministry of foreign Affairs, of all places, on Thursday, one of the historians of a long-awaited report on the role of the US secret service in the overthrow of Mossadegh and the subsequent Installation of Shah Reza Pahlevi as a puppet of Washington.

Closer game space for Iranian civil society

Darius Namazi from the National Iranian American Council, NIAC, evaluated the Tillerson’s Statements as an open commitment to regime change. In an article for the website of the Washington NGOstellte Namazi, the Administration of the previous government under Barack Obama had carefully avoided to confess to Try publicly to overthrow the Regime in Tehran: “Because that would have both the efforts of the Iranians to undermine, to urge their government in a more moderate direction, as well as opportunities to negotiate.” Ali Fatholla-Nejad to be true compared to the DW: “hardliners in Tehran exploited such anti-Iranian moods from the USA for their own purposes. This will make the civil society space in Iran, in perspective, even smaller than they already are,” said the Berlin, Iran-expert. However, Fatholla-Nejad limits, the Iranian Regime don’t need any excuses in order to justify political Repression: “they do this anyway, but it makes you the work easier.”

Conservatives and hardliners will benefit from Tillersons Comments

Signs are pointing to confrontation

As always Tillersons versions are to be understood in the house of representatives: the characters in The relationship between Washington and Tehran are on the confrontation: On Thursday, an overwhelming majority in the US voted Senate for a tightening of sanctions against Iran. One of the only two votes against came from Democrats, Bernie Sanders. Sanders sees tougher sanctions on the nuclear Deal at risk. This risk was not worth it to be received, the Democrat. Iran considers itself, according to a report by the International atomic energy Agency, IAEA of the beginning of June, so far, strictly to the agreement.

The Washington reaction to the attack of the so-called “Islamic state” in Tehran with the 17 dead in the last week were more likely to pour suitable Oil into the fire than to dampen emotions. Although the White house mourning and sympathy for the victims expressed. But the message from Washington implied at the same time, Iran would have deserved this attack: “countries that promote terrorism risk to be a victim of the Evil”, was it literally. The next day, the Republican representative Dana Rohrabacher to put. For him, the stop was “a good thing”;the United States should consider whether they should not be supporting the Sunnis, the fight against the “Shiite threat”.

Before the beginning of may, had led the first overseas trip of US President Donald Trump to Saudi Arabia. There, he danced with his hosts to the sword dance. He paved the way for a 110-billion-Dollar weapons sale to Riyadh. And Trump has made Iran as the root of all Evil in the Middle East, it is important to isolate with all means.