Since current social communities and associations are facing lack of sufficient funds they can't always use strike and movements as effective tools. Therefore, in most cases they fail. Although organizations methods to accomplish their goals is a powerful one i.e. to threat the current order to earn points needed to change the order, but due to their temporarily it fails to change it.
As a result, communities and associations can't be considered as threat for now. But what will happen if they're supported from financial powers like foreign shadow cabinets and clubs and?!
There's no doubt that the mentioned shadow cabinets and clubs wants to have the share of decision-making power (the media and political).
It's important that establishing connection between clubs or shadow cabinets and associations will cause them to get uncontrollable such as terrorism. A terrorist group will destroyed but immediately some new terrorist groups will be created because terrorism doesn't need a theory or ideology but funds so the same would be for associations and communities.
Usually in shadow cabinets broader financial resources strength than clubs but instead, clubs having influential cultural members (just like athletes, artists and etc.) can encourage associations.
It should be noted that smaller clubs may also get powerful in alliance with several other clubs.
Buying clubs is a solution that being used currently. But no capacity is infinite therefore repeating David Geffen issue will result nothing except internal decay and destruction of the decision making system.
Removing hundred scions is always safer and easier than removing a tree!
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Monday, April 14, 2014
The Non-Iranian Model For Hezbollah
What changes Hezbollah to become a threat isn't the Lebanese support towards Hezbollah, but Hezbollah's military power and its anti-Israel attitude. Even after the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war that Hezbollah considered itself as the triumphant, didn't cause it to achieve popularity and political votes. Therefore, if the anti-Israel attitude of Hezbollah lacks military power, Hezbollah is no more than a threat, because Hezbollah hasn't enough social statues!
Undoubtedly, the financial resources are the provider of Hezbollah's military power and Hassan Nasr Allah, Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, has stated that "Iran's financial support from Hezbollah has made Hezbollah need less of any trade".
Therefore, isolating Hezbollah from Iran is the key to achieve a "safe Hezbollah". Maybe it seems impossible to achieve such a goal, but when we study the Iranian history after the Revolution, we notice that the separation of political characters and groups from the Islamic Republic regime with in Iran's government has repeatedly happened. Bani-Sadr, the first president of Iran, Ayatollah Montazeri, the Supreme Leader Khomeini's successor, Mousavi Iran's former Prime Minister in Ayatollah Khamenei Presidency (the current leader), Karroubi, the former chairman of the parliament of Iran for instance.
Therefore, the separation of Hezbollah from the Islamic Republic regime of Iran isn't an unattainable goal!
First of all, Hezbollah's dependency to Tehran must be eliminated. To achieve this goal it's necessary that some new supporters, take the responsibility to support Hezbollah, and secondly, Hezbollah should be able to attain international political power without the intervention or even the participation of Iran.
For example: Creating a conference initiated by Turkey, on the crisis in Syria that can be associated with Hezbollah could be a good start.
Although new opportunities in the international arena for Hezbollah can be provided by a government or governments other than Iran, Arabic countries are certainly not a good candidate because religious disparities (Shia - Sunni) will prevent this to happen.
When Hezbollah became entirely dependent to its new international political power, the supporters would be able to raise their demands and expectations from Hezbollah. The new demand must be the ideological disconnection from Tehran. Only ideological!
And this means the clearance of the sphere of influence of the Islamic Republic in South Lebanon and the beginning of the decline in financial supports of Tehran from Hezbollah. Whenever the separation of Hezbollah from Iran is confirmed, the supports from Hezbollah can decline gradually. Thus, Hezbollah would be disarmed after a while, without even putting down the Palestinian flag and fighting against Israel. (It will die standing!) Sino-Soviet split and also the separation of Che Guevara and Fidel Castro are successful examples of implementing similar models in history.
Needless to say that multilateral support is always safer than unilateral support. So it's better to separate political support from financial support. Like the supportive pattern of al Qaeda, that's a government undertakes the political support of Hezbollah and other political states or groups undertake the financial support of Hezbollah.
Is it possible for Hezbollah to reconcile again with Iran, after the separation?
Almost no. This model obeys the theory of "burned member". The performance of this model is such that makes it impossible to use a normal member; disabling the usage is the outcomes of this model.
For example, the magazine A that is owned by the right wing, has gained some achievements due to one or more expert writers in the editorial board. The publication B belonging to the left wing, accepts a number of such writers with excellent suggestions for the publication. The achievements of the magazine A declines after a while and B fires the writers who were hired recently. These authors also fail to return to their previous positions in the magazine A.
(If we replace the titles of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal with the names A and B, we will certainly know that why the writers could not return to their previous positions.)
Undoubtedly, the financial resources are the provider of Hezbollah's military power and Hassan Nasr Allah, Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, has stated that "Iran's financial support from Hezbollah has made Hezbollah need less of any trade".
Therefore, isolating Hezbollah from Iran is the key to achieve a "safe Hezbollah". Maybe it seems impossible to achieve such a goal, but when we study the Iranian history after the Revolution, we notice that the separation of political characters and groups from the Islamic Republic regime with in Iran's government has repeatedly happened. Bani-Sadr, the first president of Iran, Ayatollah Montazeri, the Supreme Leader Khomeini's successor, Mousavi Iran's former Prime Minister in Ayatollah Khamenei Presidency (the current leader), Karroubi, the former chairman of the parliament of Iran for instance.
Therefore, the separation of Hezbollah from the Islamic Republic regime of Iran isn't an unattainable goal!
First of all, Hezbollah's dependency to Tehran must be eliminated. To achieve this goal it's necessary that some new supporters, take the responsibility to support Hezbollah, and secondly, Hezbollah should be able to attain international political power without the intervention or even the participation of Iran.
For example: Creating a conference initiated by Turkey, on the crisis in Syria that can be associated with Hezbollah could be a good start.
Although new opportunities in the international arena for Hezbollah can be provided by a government or governments other than Iran, Arabic countries are certainly not a good candidate because religious disparities (Shia - Sunni) will prevent this to happen.
When Hezbollah became entirely dependent to its new international political power, the supporters would be able to raise their demands and expectations from Hezbollah. The new demand must be the ideological disconnection from Tehran. Only ideological!
And this means the clearance of the sphere of influence of the Islamic Republic in South Lebanon and the beginning of the decline in financial supports of Tehran from Hezbollah. Whenever the separation of Hezbollah from Iran is confirmed, the supports from Hezbollah can decline gradually. Thus, Hezbollah would be disarmed after a while, without even putting down the Palestinian flag and fighting against Israel. (It will die standing!) Sino-Soviet split and also the separation of Che Guevara and Fidel Castro are successful examples of implementing similar models in history.
Needless to say that multilateral support is always safer than unilateral support. So it's better to separate political support from financial support. Like the supportive pattern of al Qaeda, that's a government undertakes the political support of Hezbollah and other political states or groups undertake the financial support of Hezbollah.
Is it possible for Hezbollah to reconcile again with Iran, after the separation?
Almost no. This model obeys the theory of "burned member". The performance of this model is such that makes it impossible to use a normal member; disabling the usage is the outcomes of this model.
For example, the magazine A that is owned by the right wing, has gained some achievements due to one or more expert writers in the editorial board. The publication B belonging to the left wing, accepts a number of such writers with excellent suggestions for the publication. The achievements of the magazine A declines after a while and B fires the writers who were hired recently. These authors also fail to return to their previous positions in the magazine A.
(If we replace the titles of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal with the names A and B, we will certainly know that why the writers could not return to their previous positions.)
Friday, April 11, 2014
Who's Afraid of the Joker Card – Ukraine?!
The release of dissatisfaction potentials after the aftershocks of the Crimean crisis is the cause of the East Ukraine 's rebellion, it means that the crisis in East Ukraine like the Arab Spring and movements of the 50s and 60s in Latin America follow a domino theory or model and aren't considered as a dependent crisis. Success and failure of such crises strongly depend on the spatial and temporal proximity to the area of a political quake. The area of the political quake in Ukraine is Crimea. Thus, the longer the time span between the Crimea crisis and the crisis in East Ukraine, the less possible is the victory of the East Ukraine rebellions. (Of course, if the rebellion does not enter an armed phase.)
The rebellions of East Ukraine need to achieve early and rapid success, because if their rebellion becomes prolonged, their rebellion will have the same fate that the revolution in Bahrain had experienced.
Bahrain's Revolution has lost most of the chance to win because of getting away from the Arab Spring. Prolongation of the objections period for any movement or any revolution which hasn't been independent but has been related to another political or social quake and is a killing factor.
Therefore, 'killing time' is a policy that can bring peace and stability back to Ukraine.
Also, as long as Crimea is living in our mind, its motivating effect will also be living for the East Ukraine and Russia. Therefore,'silence' on the experience of Crimea is a policy that can perform as a catalyzer. Let's forget Crimea's experience before it becomes a model and a symbol for the Pro-Russian, through a psychological warfare!
However, Moscow doesn't like the experience of the Crimea to be repeated about the East of Ukraine, but rather prefers to create a psychological warfare because otherwise the game will end.
It's about same the Nazi government of Germany which has won the most points through the creation of psychological warfare.
Unfortunately this isn't the whole story. If Kremlin feels to lose the game, it may choose any irrational choice like: Hitler, Muammar Gaddafi and ….
In other words, Moscow is trying to create a psychological warfare using the crisis in East Ukraine and gain points through this psychological warfare but if it feels to lose in this psychological war, it may use any unreasonable options such as military options.
Therefore the responsibility of the West is that,firstly the crisis in East Ukraine ends, and secondly, the psychological warfare does not end to an armed conflict.
About solving the crisis in East Ukraine some explanations were given, but about with standing against changing the psychological war to an armed conflict, it should be said:
Creating an active and temporary diplomacy channel with Russia about Ukraine's crisis create the illusion for Moscow that Western governments have entered the field of Russian game or that they have taken Kremlin's joker card in Ukraine; the card that should never be taken!
On the other hand, China must know that supporting Moscow would not be unanswered. The issue of Taiwan, the Chinese market in America, the Senkaku Islands dispute are issues through addressing which Peking can be easily dissuaded from the idea of supporting Moscow in the crisis of East Ukraine.
For example: only promoting the slogan "Buying Chinese goods is supporting the Chinese government" can be minatory for the Chinese market in America, but this slogan shouldn't be addressed by the government and members of the political class, because the aim is not to create tension in United States - China relationship.
The rebellions of East Ukraine need to achieve early and rapid success, because if their rebellion becomes prolonged, their rebellion will have the same fate that the revolution in Bahrain had experienced.
Bahrain's Revolution has lost most of the chance to win because of getting away from the Arab Spring. Prolongation of the objections period for any movement or any revolution which hasn't been independent but has been related to another political or social quake and is a killing factor.
Therefore, 'killing time' is a policy that can bring peace and stability back to Ukraine.
Also, as long as Crimea is living in our mind, its motivating effect will also be living for the East Ukraine and Russia. Therefore,'silence' on the experience of Crimea is a policy that can perform as a catalyzer. Let's forget Crimea's experience before it becomes a model and a symbol for the Pro-Russian, through a psychological warfare!
However, Moscow doesn't like the experience of the Crimea to be repeated about the East of Ukraine, but rather prefers to create a psychological warfare because otherwise the game will end.
It's about same the Nazi government of Germany which has won the most points through the creation of psychological warfare.
Unfortunately this isn't the whole story. If Kremlin feels to lose the game, it may choose any irrational choice like: Hitler, Muammar Gaddafi and ….
In other words, Moscow is trying to create a psychological warfare using the crisis in East Ukraine and gain points through this psychological warfare but if it feels to lose in this psychological war, it may use any unreasonable options such as military options.
Therefore the responsibility of the West is that,firstly the crisis in East Ukraine ends, and secondly, the psychological warfare does not end to an armed conflict.
About solving the crisis in East Ukraine some explanations were given, but about with standing against changing the psychological war to an armed conflict, it should be said:
Creating an active and temporary diplomacy channel with Russia about Ukraine's crisis create the illusion for Moscow that Western governments have entered the field of Russian game or that they have taken Kremlin's joker card in Ukraine; the card that should never be taken!
On the other hand, China must know that supporting Moscow would not be unanswered. The issue of Taiwan, the Chinese market in America, the Senkaku Islands dispute are issues through addressing which Peking can be easily dissuaded from the idea of supporting Moscow in the crisis of East Ukraine.
For example: only promoting the slogan "Buying Chinese goods is supporting the Chinese government" can be minatory for the Chinese market in America, but this slogan shouldn't be addressed by the government and members of the political class, because the aim is not to create tension in United States - China relationship.
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
Russian Middle East crosses from Iran
Soon, the second stage in the Iranian government's economic plan begins. A program that the implementation of the first step led to a sharp increase in the prices of consumer goods and devalued the national currency of Iran (IRR) and led to inflation.
It's expected that the second phase of the government 's economic program is similar to the first stage. In such circumstances, the most important threat that will worry the government, is the threat to public order and security of the regime.
Usually radical groups in Iran will have the opportunity to share the authority or even confiscate it, re- establish public order or guarantee it after a threat to public order.
Currently Russia is ready to support the Iranian radicalism and take control of the Middle East by endangering order in the area by the radical government.
Surely Russia 2014, won't be like Russia 2013. If Europe ignores the interests of Russia, therefore Russia doesn't have any reason to respect the standard of Europe and U.S in the Middle East.
Arab League can ask Russia for the guarantee of its interests, but Israel can't seek to do so. Release of Iranian radicalism and the tendency of Arabic countries to Russia, will put Tel Aviv in unreliable security situation.
Tel Aviv expectation from Washington is that the White House really supports the Israel's security, not verbal and dramatic support as the one that had previously in former regime in Iran!
Iran's government may choose peace and compromise with the western countries rather than resorting to adopt extremist forces. But as the domestic and foreign politicians’ pressure (Russia and China) turned the hope of reform in North Korea to despair, it's likely that Iran has a destiny like North Korea!
It's expected that the second phase of the government 's economic program is similar to the first stage. In such circumstances, the most important threat that will worry the government, is the threat to public order and security of the regime.
Usually radical groups in Iran will have the opportunity to share the authority or even confiscate it, re- establish public order or guarantee it after a threat to public order.
Currently Russia is ready to support the Iranian radicalism and take control of the Middle East by endangering order in the area by the radical government.
Surely Russia 2014, won't be like Russia 2013. If Europe ignores the interests of Russia, therefore Russia doesn't have any reason to respect the standard of Europe and U.S in the Middle East.
Arab League can ask Russia for the guarantee of its interests, but Israel can't seek to do so. Release of Iranian radicalism and the tendency of Arabic countries to Russia, will put Tel Aviv in unreliable security situation.
Tel Aviv expectation from Washington is that the White House really supports the Israel's security, not verbal and dramatic support as the one that had previously in former regime in Iran!
Iran's government may choose peace and compromise with the western countries rather than resorting to adopt extremist forces. But as the domestic and foreign politicians’ pressure (Russia and China) turned the hope of reform in North Korea to despair, it's likely that Iran has a destiny like North Korea!
Friday, April 4, 2014
Russia and the coup in the Middle East
Washington implemented suspension option of some sanctions against Iranian students (studying at universities in the United States) and universities in Iran as carrot policy toward Iran. An option to jeopardize Russian interests in Iran with the aim of deterring Russia's expansionism policies adopted and implemented in the foreign arena. However, while the White House was disappointed of other options selected this option. Washington even performed ping-pong diplomacy policy simulation that ran by Michelle Obama but didn't succeed.
Although this option has been selected late, the results were successful. At this time Iran hasn't any reaction to the Crimea and Russia. Kremlin supports Iran's nuclear program and it's clear that it made a pressure on Tehran by its supports. So, Russia expected Iran to recognize Crimea's joining to Russia like Belarus and Afghanistan. But Iran still has refused such favoritism. From the other side, since Crimea was an autonomous republic, so independence is inherent right of this government. Surely if Mr.Obama has forgotten the lessons of law school, Mrs. Michelle Obama is certainly nice to know that this independence is penetrating and joining to another government is agree with international law, as the separation of Texas from Mexico and joining to the United States which considered to be correct. However this time Iran supported the position of the international community rather than Russia.
But if US government didn't lay Iran's card on the table, Russia possibly had decided to bet on Middle East with Iranian card.
Russia could increase its support of Iran to allow Iranian political radicalism to be released. Like the action that Washington did about Jakarta and Suharto. The release of political radicalism in Iran at the first step threatens the established order in the Middle East. So the Arab countries will be force to seek new powers to protect and ensure the safety of their own. Then the Russia would gain the opportunity to replace the United States in the Middle East order.
The old theory of virus and anti virus. You surely know that some manufacturers of anti virus are those that created the viruses and they're the creator of the virus themselves. So the anti virus vendor is the creator of the virus.
Russia now is trying to broaden and deepen its ties with the Arab League but Arab League at this time doesn't necessarily need broad relations with Russia.
Although this option has been selected late, the results were successful. At this time Iran hasn't any reaction to the Crimea and Russia. Kremlin supports Iran's nuclear program and it's clear that it made a pressure on Tehran by its supports. So, Russia expected Iran to recognize Crimea's joining to Russia like Belarus and Afghanistan. But Iran still has refused such favoritism. From the other side, since Crimea was an autonomous republic, so independence is inherent right of this government. Surely if Mr.Obama has forgotten the lessons of law school, Mrs. Michelle Obama is certainly nice to know that this independence is penetrating and joining to another government is agree with international law, as the separation of Texas from Mexico and joining to the United States which considered to be correct. However this time Iran supported the position of the international community rather than Russia.
But if US government didn't lay Iran's card on the table, Russia possibly had decided to bet on Middle East with Iranian card.
Russia could increase its support of Iran to allow Iranian political radicalism to be released. Like the action that Washington did about Jakarta and Suharto. The release of political radicalism in Iran at the first step threatens the established order in the Middle East. So the Arab countries will be force to seek new powers to protect and ensure the safety of their own. Then the Russia would gain the opportunity to replace the United States in the Middle East order.
The old theory of virus and anti virus. You surely know that some manufacturers of anti virus are those that created the viruses and they're the creator of the virus themselves. So the anti virus vendor is the creator of the virus.
Russia now is trying to broaden and deepen its ties with the Arab League but Arab League at this time doesn't necessarily need broad relations with Russia.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Israel's decision for Tel Aviv!
Many of human right activists, people and even some politicians in the world take Tel Aviv responsible for the failure of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. While the peace between Israel and the Palestinians need unity of all Palestinian groups. In current situation, the most important issue for Palestine is presence of extremist organization and groups such as Hamas and the Lebanese Hezbollah which believe in armed conflict. Surely, if the peace talks be successful, the extremist groups will change the resulting peace into insecurity and war in both Israeli and Palestine. Even it's possible that the extremist groups which are now like a shadow cabinet and also own weapons attempt coup and control the government after recognition of Palestine as an independent country and success of peace negotiation.
Israel doesn't want theater acting of peace but real peace is the aim of Israel. But as long as Palestinian National Authority can't cancel the threat of extremism, it will be impossible to achieve the peace.
Also the international community just like Tel Aviv failed to trust to Palestinian. Legal status of the state of Palestine isn't more complex that Taiwan's for sure. But countries by establishing consular and commercial relation with Taiwan convert the state to one of the most influential economic power in the world.
It's should be noted that from the perspective of international law independence of Taiwan from China is illegal because unlike countries such as USA, India, Switzerland and etc. China isn't federal and any province in China can't have privilege of the autonomy (unlike the situation of states in federal) and thus can't be independent.
But most countries are reluctant to take the same policy in Palestine as they applied for Taiwan. So Israel view to Palestine issue isn't limited only to Tel Aviv but also has global scope.
Undoubtedly peace is the wish of all Israel people. Peace can have real positive results even for those citizens who are only thinking of their own interests including eliminating the military services obligation in Israel. Length of this obligation period is 3 years of men and 2 years for women which can probably change by peace establishment to a selective one rather than being an obligation or reduce military budget and heath or education budget increase instead.
The new generations of Israel politician which is born in last few year want establishing a new order in Middle East.
Clearly they want to leave the old existing tradition and orders.
Tel Aviv wants all European, American and Middle East countries try to bring out Hamas and Hezbollah from current armed and dangerous situation as an essential prerequisite for peace and identify the problem of instability in Palestine as an obstacle for peace establishment.
Israel doesn't want theater acting of peace but real peace is the aim of Israel. But as long as Palestinian National Authority can't cancel the threat of extremism, it will be impossible to achieve the peace.
Also the international community just like Tel Aviv failed to trust to Palestinian. Legal status of the state of Palestine isn't more complex that Taiwan's for sure. But countries by establishing consular and commercial relation with Taiwan convert the state to one of the most influential economic power in the world.
It's should be noted that from the perspective of international law independence of Taiwan from China is illegal because unlike countries such as USA, India, Switzerland and etc. China isn't federal and any province in China can't have privilege of the autonomy (unlike the situation of states in federal) and thus can't be independent.
But most countries are reluctant to take the same policy in Palestine as they applied for Taiwan. So Israel view to Palestine issue isn't limited only to Tel Aviv but also has global scope.
Undoubtedly peace is the wish of all Israel people. Peace can have real positive results even for those citizens who are only thinking of their own interests including eliminating the military services obligation in Israel. Length of this obligation period is 3 years of men and 2 years for women which can probably change by peace establishment to a selective one rather than being an obligation or reduce military budget and heath or education budget increase instead.
The new generations of Israel politician which is born in last few year want establishing a new order in Middle East.
Clearly they want to leave the old existing tradition and orders.
Tel Aviv wants all European, American and Middle East countries try to bring out Hamas and Hezbollah from current armed and dangerous situation as an essential prerequisite for peace and identify the problem of instability in Palestine as an obstacle for peace establishment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)