Syria: The Second Step

Regional and geopolitical objectives of Tehran have way greater positions before the government than its economy. The Iranian economy is an internal player that does not play for domestic games. If one wants to know about the current economic performance of the Islamic Republic, the financial situation of the Hezbollah must be checked over, and not the Tehran stock market.
In a typical 'unbalanced defense' strategy, small players would increasingly rise and fall in order to protect national security. But ironically, the Iranian national security including economic and even political security is going to be sacrificed for saving that very little pawns. Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas are in fact 'pawns' that act as 'queens' for Tehran. Therefore, the regime's existence is relying on them. 
The national security strategy of the Islamic Republic is not merely unbalanced but it is a sick strategy just like the strategic vision of Mussolini in the World War II as it was evidently affected by his personal obsessions. 
Syria and Hezbollah cannot be considered threatening actors of the region but they are definitely the morphine of Tehran.

Israel-Palestine: R2P

A domestic issue with international side effects is a global issue.
The current situation governing Israel-Palestine cannot be found merely domestic issues of these parties. The dispute of Israeli and Palestinian states itself has been the origin of a few wars and emergence of militia and terrorist groups in the region, which are threats against all. 
The continues violation of human rights and humanitarian law by third parties like Hamas and Hezbollah under the shade of the dispute is now identified a constant parameter in this regard. Therefore, the world community and the major Arab states have this right to take advantage of all means to settle peace by invoking the principle of Responsibility to Protect. It is evident, the principle would legitimate any essential decision on behalf of Palestinian nation by the world community if the Palestinian state fails to accomplish its part. 
At the end, the model of multilateral negotiation among Israel, West Bank and the GCC is recommended.

Lebanon and Terrorism

Lebanon is the only Arab country where Christians form around half of its population. Therefore, Lebanon is at a vulnerable position toward the danger of terrorism. Terrorist groups in the region may allow Muslims to survive by imposing tough rules and harsh condition but they never give other faiths such a chance. They would kill and enslave the Yazidis and the Christians. 
If Lebanon's Hezbollah has been a terrorist organization, Christians, Sunnis and those who do not believe to any spiritual faith but having fun in Beirut's bars must have been complaining about Hezbollah. But why none of them submit even a report against Hezbollah, which is a Shia political and paramilitary organization?! 
Traditionally, a terrorist group is one that tries to impose its own ideology or faith to others by force. While Hezbollah has a moderate attitude toward social and cultural issues and it has not attacked freedom of people in Lebanon yet though the domain of freedom might contradicts Islam and Sharia Law. Politically, Hezbollah committed to democracy and diplomacy and it never tried to abuse its military power to occupy Beirut by a coup while the present condition of the country could be tempting. In addition, it would be a useful training to sometime answer to arguments rather than repeating old allegations. 
Political instability of Lebanon is an evident fact and considering its own vulnerable position and critical situation of borders with Syria, strengthening Hezbollah is vital to keep counter-terrorism powerful. 
Removing competitor is the nature of politics and without a doubt Tehran, Bashar al-Assad, Hezbollah and perhaps Yemen’s Ansarullah are regional rivals of the West in the Middle East but eliminating them, thorough unusual, unprofessional and hastily acts could only create crisis. This approach of the Western States needs revision.

Israel-Iran: Facts

Facts are part of the truth, and if we are seeking the truth it is necessary not to deny the facts. 
Iran is being accused of anti-Semitism through Tel Aviv frequently and in addition it claims that Tehran is a major threat to the security of Israel. 
But it should be said in response to the claim: 
First, even conservative politicians and leaders of Iran have not been anti- Semitism. Because Ruhollah Khomeini considered Jews independent and separate from Israel. Ahmadinejad followed Ayatollah Khomeini's doctrine as well and during his presidency tried to consider a separation between the Jewish community and Israel. Consequently, he met rabbis in friendly meetings several times in New York and Tehran. He also has repeatedly said that global issues including the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory can be solved only through "negotiations" and "peace". 
Secondly, Iranian government consider the origin of the formation of the state of Israel illegal and it believed that the fate of Palestine-Israel territory should be determined through a comprehensive referendum with the presence of Jews and Arabs of the region in order to choose one of these two theories, "two-state" and "unified state". In other words, selecting the solution assigns to the people.
Thirdly, Iran never threatened to attack Israel. Hezbollah which also enjoys Tehran support has recently announced that not willing to start a new war with Israel.

The Issue of Islam: What Are Muslims Looking For?

Islam as a religion, thought or ideology, is not regarded in any way as an issue unless it is only the provider of the private life standards of Muslims. But the concerns begin when a minority of the population of the Muslims wants to use Islam as a pattern to regulate the objectives, standards and their public lifestyle. The cause of these concerns is that the groups which have attempted to provide a public lifestyle (social - political) model of Islam are usually considered as extremist groups.
ISIS, Hezbollah and the Taliban, are among the groups that have attempted to provide a social and political model of Islam.
It is clear that the models of the moderate Islam are presented in countries such as Turkey and Indonesia. But all the moderate models that have been presented for Islam are only limited to the private lives of individuals. Whereas a minority of Muslims (which the numbers are not low) are always are looking for a model of Islam to encompass the whole of their private and public lives. Certainly, if no one provides them a moderate version of Islam for the public lifestyle, they will consequently join groups such as Hezbollah, ISIS and etc.
An issue similar to this was during the Cold War, entitled as "the issue of Marxism". European and American Marxists had to search for Marxism in Soviet and China and thus the fate of their political orientation leads to any of these two countries, and thus the threat begins at this stage. Whereas if the West, like Lenin or Mao was attempting to formulate a theory for Marxism, probably a large part of European and American political interest was not growing towards China or the Soviet Union.
It should not be forgotten that most of the Marxist movements in the 1960s in Europe and mostly in France, were politically tending towards China. It certainly was not because they were preferring Maoism to Leninism, but rather was because even they themselves were searching for an ideological base except of Moscow.

Syria and the Rise of a New Order in the Middle East

The Best Middle east order pattern could be implemented and began by with the fall of Assad's regime. Although this did not happen, but this does not mean that other routes to enter a new Middle East and to modify the order dominating would be inaccessible and impossible.
Now with regard to Assad's desire to perpetuate his kingship in Syria on the one hand and the confrontation of Syria with issues such as severe international sanctions, economic damage, strained relations with the region and the recognition of the Syrian opposition on the other hand, provides the creation of a new opportunity to change the order in Syria for the international community.
There is no doubt that Bashar al-Assad is forced to get rid of at least the pressure of sanctions, political isolation and the opposition which he has recognized to return its previous position.Thus it can be said that today's Syria is in the same status that Vietnam was in after the war ended and this means a great opportunity for Washington to be able to lead Damascus the way it likes through playing the pressure cards.  
Thus, we can predict that as of today there is nothing but the name of socialism in Vietnam, in the future Syria there would only be a name of Bashar al-Assad and his regime, whereas the general policy has changed.
Islamic Republic of Iran and Hezbollah are considered as the effective players in the order of Middle East which have a direct impact on the fate of the Israel and Palestinian are the allies of Syria belonging to Bashar al-Assad. Therefore, Assad's changing political practices in the international arena and towards issues like Israel and Palestine could definitely be replaced with radical thought as a model for its friends in Tehran and Hezbollah. But it should not be forgotten that Syria in contrast, will have the chance to receive support from the governments and various groups by selling its energy for a cheap price!!!

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.)

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.