Why Iran experts are skeptical about the significance of Tehran's new deal with Beijing

[jamal18]

A piece of paper can say anything. Just look at JCPOA. There is no honor in written agreements anymore.

So this so called China-Iran partnership deal is smoke and mirrors until we see concrete results.

Yes, some truth in that.

On the other hand, China isn't America.

 

[mohsen]

China Chooses Sides In The Middle East | American Foreign Policy Council

The American Foreign Policy Council is a non-profit U.S. foreign policy think tank operating in Washington, D.C., since 1982.

www.afpc.org

China Chooses Sides In The Middle East

March 30, 2021
Ilan I. Berman Senior Vice President of the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, DC


China's geopolitical ambitions in the Middle East took a giant leap forward over the weekend, when Chinese and Iranian officials convened in Tehran to formally sign a massive new cooperation agreement. The summit, which took place during a state visit to the Islamic Republic by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, codifies a trend that has been in the works for some time: a major strategic alignment between Beijing and Tehran.

The broad contours of the arrangement have been known for months. Last summer, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif revealed publicly that the country's parliament (or majles) was in the final stages of drafting a plan for long-term cooperation with the People's Republic of China (PRC). The notional agreement was a sprawling 25-year strategic accord valued at a staggering $400 billion, encompassing everything from Chinese involvement in Iran's telecom sector to closer collaboration between the militaries of the two countries. And while the full details of the "comprehensive strategic partnership" just codified by the Iranian and Chinese foreign ministers have yet to be disclosed, they appear to be more or less the same as those being considered back in June.

For Beijing, the accord represents a clear strategic coup. Through it, the PRC has received – among many other things – preferential access to a bevy of Iranian infrastructure projects, and secured new ports and naval facilities to accommodate its burgeoning regional trade and growing maritime presence. In exchange, China has formally assumed the role of the Islamic Republic's main global partner – and its economic lifeline in the face of any future pressure that might be marshalled by the U.S. or Europe.

Yet the agreement is also an indicator that China's regional footprint is shifting. Over the past half-decade, Beijing has focused intently on expanding its influence in the Middle East through economic investments, political support for regional regimes and even deepening contacts with local militaries. Some of that attention is unquestionably tied to the country's "Belt & Road Initiative," a broad web of infrastructure projects and trade deals through which Beijing is now seeking to remake the global order. But China's Mideast push is opportunistic as well; as the United States has progressively pulled back from regional affairs in recent years, it has left empty political space that the PRC has been only too happy to fill.

Up until now, however, China has taken pains to straddle the Middle East's deep sectarian divisions. Beijing's overtures to Shi'ite Iran, for instance, have historically been balanced by outreach to Sunni states such as Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. Those countries, in turn, benefited handsomely from massive Chinese investment, which has made them loathe to criticize China's brutal clampdown on its Uighur Muslim minority or to heed Washington's call about the need to choose sides in the emerging "great power competition" between the U.S. and the PRC.

Now, however, the new Sino-Iranian accord threatens to tip that balance. Through it, China's government seems to be sending the signal that Iran's clerical regime has become its regional partner of choice. The deal, while clearly designed to capitalize on Iran's current weakened state, also catapults the Islamic Republic to the very top of the PRC's regional agenda, and does so in a way that could end up significantly strengthening the current government in Tehran.

Beijing's bureaucrats will, of course, try to convince the region's Sunni regimes that nothing has changed. But officials in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and other Middle Eastern capitals would be prudent to press China about the details of its new strategic alignment with the Islamic Republic. They should also be asking how, precisely, the PRC plans to remain a reliable partner for them, given its growing economic, political and military bonds to the country that serves as their regional nemesis.

 

[Aramagedon]

Prophet (PBUH) said: seek knowledges even if you have to go to china.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Prophet (PBUH) said: seek knowledges even if you have to go to china.

well people at the time didn't knew about USA otherwise holy prophet would have said seek knowledge if you have to go to China or USA.
in fact if you look at the holy prophet deed you see after he established Islamic government in medina the condition for let the defeated heathen who were literate to get freed was to teach 10 illiterate Muslim to read and write . he didn't ask any money of them or didn't told them to become Muslim .

 

[mohsen]

خبرگزاری فارس - چین حاضر به مذاکره با دولت نبود لذا لاریجانی برای پیگیری تفاهم حکم گرفت

مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم گفت: چینی‌ها عنوان کرده بودند حاضر نیستند با دولت ایران به خاطر رفتارش پس از برجام مذاکره کنند، اما آمادگی خود را برای مذاکره با مجموعه نظام اعلام داشتند و علی لاریجانی برای انجام مذاکره با چین حکم گرفت.

www.farsnews.ir

Adviser of the current head of Parliament revealed:
Due to behavior of pro-west reformist government in Iran after JCPOA, China had refused to negotiate with any of them, so Iranian leader had appointed the head of Parliament as the representative of Iran for this strategic agreement.


In a blunt admission, Iranian reformist foreign minister M.J Zarif said "favoring the east is useless"; My guess is because he can't sell the country!

 

[WudangMaster]

In a blunt admission, Iranian reformist foreign minister M.J Zarif said "favoring the east is useless"; My guess is because he can't sell the country!

That closeted transvestite whore is upset because he can't dress as drag queen and parade in Beijing like he did in San Francisco in his youth. At this point, the garbage rohani admin is being waited out by Humans and nothing they say should be taken seriously anymore.

 

[aryobarzan]

That closeted transvestite whore is upset because he can't dress as drag queen and parade in Beijing like he did in San Francisco in his youth. At this point, the garbage rohani admin is being waited out by Humans and nothing they say should be taken seriously anymore.

Yup...China hated this Rohanni government and you will not see any actual contracts until the new Government comes in..then watch out for hundreds of contracts being announced. Iran almost missed the "belt and Road" mega project under this 5th column Rohanni team...the shit that will come out after they are gone!!
چین حاضر به مذاکره با دولت نبود لذا لاریجانی برای پیگیری تفاهم حکم گرفت
مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم گفت: چینی‌ها عنوان کرده بودند حاضر نیستند با دولت ایران به خاطر رفتارش پس از برجام مذاکره کنند، اما آمادگی خود را برای مذاکره با مجموعه نظام اعلام داشتند و علی لاریجانی برای انجام مذاکره با چین حکم گرفت.

منصور حقیقت‌پور در گفت‌وگو با خبرنگار پارلمانی خبرگزاری فارس،‌ با اشاره به اخبار منتشر شده درباره مسؤول مذاکره‌کننده با کشور چین برای امضای تفاهم‌نامه 25 ساله گفت:‌ مقامات دولتی این کشور رسما ناراحتی خود را از رفتار دولت یازدهم و دوازدهم بعد از برجام اعلام کردند.
وی افزود: مقامات چینی عنوان می‌کردند که دولت ایران پس از برجام دولت چین را تحویل نگرفت و در واقع چین را تحقیر کرد و ما حاضر به همکاری با دولت ایران نیستیم ولی اگر «نظام» جمهوری اسلامی می‌خواهد با ما تعامل کند، ما هستیم.
مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم اظهار داشت: مقام معظم رهبری در آن زمان رئیس مجلس وقت [علی لاریجانی]‌ را به عنوان مسؤول پیشبرد سند همکاری با چین می‌کنند و برای وی در این باره حکم صادر و آقای لاریجانی را رسما برای این منظور به مقامات چینی معرفی می‌کنند.
حقیقت‌پور خاطرنشان کرد: مجلس دهم و دوره ریاست آقای لاریجانی بر مجلس به پایان می‌رسد اما آقای لاریجانی در دوره مجلس یازدهم به رهبر معظم انقلاب می‌گوید من دیگر رئیس مجلس نیستم و اجازه بدهید کار را رئیس مجلس وقت ادامه دهد اما رهبر معظم انقلاب قبول نمی‌کنند و می‌گویند که کار را خودت ادامه بده.
وی افزود: در دوره فعلی که آقای لاریجانی رئیس مجلس نیست در مکاتباتی که با چین دارد سمتش را مشاور رهبر انقلاب و مجری پروژه توافق‌نامه 25 ساله عنوان می‌کند.
مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم اظهار داشت: در جاده کمربندی که به صورت ریلی و راه آسفالت در نظر گرفته شده بود و بنا بود قاره‌های آفریقا، آسیا و اروپا را به هم متصل کند و این راه از بیش از 100 کشور عبور می‌کند، که پیش از مذاکرات با چین، ایران در نقشه این راه قرار نداشت اما پس از مذاکراتی که آقای لاریجانی با چینی‌ها داشت مسیر نقشه جاده تغییر کرد و بنا شد این جاده از ایران گذر کند که منافع زیادی را از بُعد تجاری برای ما به همراه دارد.
انتهای پیام/

 

[925boy]

While i usually dont like PRESSTV, this article on PRESSTV is probably the best explanations on the reasoning and value of the China-Iran megadeal. Yes, its a regional game changer. US for sure has no real options against Iran(if there is any 1 currently, please let me know). Please learn:

Nixon ‘opened’ China, but only superpower China could ‘open’ Iran (1/2)

Friday, 02 April 2021 2:52 PM [ Last Update: Friday, 02 April 2021 2:52 PM ]

By Ramin Mazaheri
Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.

One thing about Western business media is that whenever any imperialism-opposing nation has a major success their subsequent understatement speaks volumes, as evidenced by an article in the oil trade press, The Iran-China Axis Is A Fast Growing Force In Oil Markets, at the website OilPrice. For trade journalists they are quite behind the trends of their industry: Iran and China are now a permanent force in the oil world, but far beyond that realm as well.
In reading OilPrice over the years I am not surprised: they have repeatedly reacted to the bilateral 25-year strategic agreement — which has just been fully signed — as though it was something which had not been in discussion for years; with total consternation as to why these two countries could want to ally with other; with an Iranophobia so enormous that their bias is rarely even barely concealed.
The outlook of their journalists is that of businessmen, and thus it’s the incredibly narrow and self-serving point of view of a specialist. It is unsurprising that — when compelled to formulate a political or moral viewpoint — OilPrice has a totally Cold War view of the world, which is typical in the West, and which explains why their headline calls it an “Iran-China Axis” instead of an “Alliance.” The use of such a term is typical Western media propaganda designed to conflate the right-wing Germans of the World War II era with modern Iran and China, even though the latter are totally different from the former in political ideology, economic structure and social morality.
It’s a nonsensical and historically-nihilist conflation, but when examining OilPrice’s take on the Iran-China deal, we are reminded that Western business media is quite content to sensationalize, to warmonger and to create sustained market panic in order to increase the grip of militarism in the Western psyche and to continue the inequitable Western domination of the oil trade. OilPrice, specifically, also wants the price of oil to always increase.
Thus the article is full of many stupidities worthy of the idiocies of George W. Bush, the paranoia of J. Edgar Hoover, the anti-socialist hysteria of the Dulles brothers and the hypocritical phoniness of Barack Obama. Things of the lowest order of political analysis and knowledge abound, such as: “The first is they are both absolute dictatorships,” “the rogue Islamic country,” China’s Belt and Road Initiative is “a shield for China's true intentions” and a “Trojan horse” for “military expansion,” etc.
(Of course, few international projects as transparently pragmatic and non-ideological as China’s BRI — if you accept China’s offer of mutually-beneficial cooperation there is no additional demand to also legislate acceptance of their “universal” values.)
But we benefit from knowing the oil trade’s viewpoint because while there are so very many financial shenanigans in the Western economy, there is still a “real” economy, and oil is its lynchpin.
Oil is also the lynchpin of the US dollar’s global preeminence and overvaluation. Indeed, this article’s concluding paragraph is a reminder of those very fundamental — yet often forgotten — facts: “Finally, the introduction of a war premium to oil prices will cause a commensurate re-evaluation of oil equities in non-belligerent countries. The modern economy runs on petroleum products and derivatives, and will for many decades.”
The Great Financial Crisis and subsequent Great Recession proved that the Western economy is indeed incredibly vulnerable to many types of phonily-inflated equities, economic fundamentals-untethered financial products, sham derivatives concocted by high finance and more besides. However, the author is correct when he writes that paragraph because the Petrodollar — the forced sale of oil in dollars — is the most important and longest-running financial sham. It replaced the gold standard, after all.
But China and Iran’s unprecedented petrodollar end run (and via a new joint China-Iranian bank) is just one part of why their bilateral agreement is such a huge deal. Not only does the pact upset the delicate balance of Western financial chicanery, but it permanently upsets longstanding Western geopolitical advantages, global geopolitical reality and especially the idea that the United States is the sole portal through which modern history can enter.
US has fallen so very far since 1971— now they are even behind China, and Iran just proved it

The bilateral deal’s importance can’t be understated for either side, and I have written about it for years. It’s as if — in the year 1545 — the Bolivian silver miners at Potosi struck a fair deal with the Spanish crown: Instead of getting enslaved, sham conversions and colonized Bolivia would still be an Incan cultural force today, with almost 500 additional years of illustrious history, learning and advancement. Thankfully, China is socialist — thus it is anti-imperialist and mindfully chooses cooperation over enslavement (either literally, through local puppets or through debt). Thankfully, Iran is not the shell-shocked Inca — they know who their enemies are, and also who works with enough goodwill to be welcomed.

For a more modern take, the deal is the equivalent of Richard Nixon’s “Opening of China” in 1971, except in a total role reversal: What is historically vital is no longer the position of the US, but the attitude of the superpower China.
Iran is often described as the last great “untapped market” — against all odds, expectations and supposed historical inevitabilities they chose the East as partners, not the West. That’s gigantic.
The deal will mark the “Opening of Iran” because it is not a mere “lifeline” to Iran - as it is often falsely described - but a guarantee of real prosperity, as it will be administered by Iran’s successful, revolutionary political structure. It is absolutely not more than just the achievement of stability, which Iran achieved entirely on its own starting in 1979, when the slogan was “Neither East nor West but the Islamic Republic.”
To quote from the OilPrice article:
“The New York Times is quoted as saying-
‘The partnership, detailed in an 18-page proposed agreement obtained by The New York Times, would vastly expand Chinese presence in banking, telecommunications, ports, railways, and dozens of other projects. In exchange, China would receive a regular — and, according to an Iranian official and an oil trader, heavily discounted — supply of Iranian oil over the next 25 years.’
And there you have it.”
And there you have it, indeed.
Iran-China deal challenges Biden’s efforts to weaken Beijing:...
Oil-based cars and machines may be significantly phased out by greener technologies in 25 years or so, but Iran has made a superb bargain to sell as much oil as they can while they still can. The “heavy discount” is only about 4%, but I can see how - as a Western “oilfield veteran” - this OilPrice author expects everyone to scratch and claw for every penny he or she can grab. For Iranian bureaucrats, however, a longer-term economic view is required, as is less greed.

War — and sanctions (what used to be called “blockades” in English) are indeed war — certainly does force civilians and civil servants into more moral and more intelligent behaviors: self-sacrifice, unity, collective action, planning, determination, study, reflection, etc. The West’s sanctions have been perhaps praised in Iran nearly as often as they have been derided because Iran has had no choice but to build up its domestic capabilities — economic, intellectual, moral and natural — which naturally demanded a long-term commitment of domestic effort, political policies and acceptance of the national consensus.

But if the economic impact of illegal Western sanctions encouraged Iran’s leaders to make a 25-year oil bargain at only a 4% loss, then I say: take the money and run. If Washington, London, Paris and Tel Aviv fully had their way Donald Trump would have succeeded in forcing Iran to get 0% value from China —instead Tehran settled for 96% value over 25 years. If Iran doesn’t get yuan for every barrel that’s fine —China has technologies and skills which Iran can learn from, assimilate into future domestic projects and then likely export.
But this is what nobody seems to get about the indubitably socialist-inspired modern Iranian economy: Iran doesn’t do Western capitalism, i.e. it doesn’t sell out. Chinese companies will work alongside Iranian industries, all of which are state-owned and state-controlled to a degree which is unthinkable in the neoliberal West. China is not “buying” Iranian corporations - this is not $400 billion in “mergers” and “take-overs” — they are buying Iranian products or bartering for them via techniques Iran can learn from and projects which Iran needs to see built.
And there you have it: Iran secured money and intellectual investment for 25-years, and there is no danger of this investment being hijacked by foreign capital from any nation, which is how foreign investment works in Western neoliberalism. If the Iranian government can redistribute money downwards so effectively over four decades of hot and cold war, then surely they can do better in times of economic prosperity —this is the argument many Iranians have made over and over and over, and the West is fearfully aware of this rationale.
$16 billion per year in cash/goods/skills, and throw in a little thing called diplomatic unity, over 25 years - remember to compare that with what the West just offered: In 2019 France proposed a one-time $15 billion credit line. It was shot down by Washington, and of course Europe complied because neither want Iran to be prosperous or stable.
An incredibly ‘woke’ cooperation between 2 different ethnicities, cultures, regions & religions
Iran has proven to the world that America no longer has the ability to control the main global gate, and that is indeed a real achievement, but this achievement was equally fueled by Western incompetence, cruelty, intolerance and greed. Iran and China have risen, thanks to their modern and revolutionary cultures and structures — of course — but just look at how far the West has fallen since 1971?
As for China it’s vital to remember that it was an oil embargo which pushed fascist Japan into war with the United States, but China now has a guaranteed source of oil stability. China, which imports 75% of its daily needs, is almost as oil-poor as Japan but now no matter what Western adventurism produces in the Straits of Hormuz Beijing can count on the certainty of enough oil supplies to get by.
Iranian oil is already serving as Beijing’s backup against Western imperialist immolation, as the OilPrice article relates in detail: “China is stockpiling oil at a pace unrivaled in the developed world.” Doing so is, “In a marked dichotomy with the U.S., China is building oil inventories by design.” China, in contrast to Western liberal democracy, actually has competent civil service motivated — not by “universal” values, perhaps — by actual values instead of personal greed.
And there you have it: good governance based on modern political ideas which value the individual citizen over the aristocrat’s dollars. That’s the reason why Iran and China rankle the West so much.
So how could the West possibly like the 25-year strategic pact - it’s a “permanent” sea change. It’s a “permanent” step up in class for both Iran and China, and via an incredibly unprecedented cooperation. “Our relations with Iran will not be affected by the current situation, but will be permanent and strategic,” said China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi at the signing.
But it’s not based on mere dollars — it’s a “pact” in a very broad cultural and political sense, and that’s both a shocking rejection of the Western model and the exciting proposal of something new for global humanity.
China and the USSR never cooperated as closely as this. Impressive Cuba, all alone in the New World, just can’t bring the heft which Iran brings to the table. North Korea is so beset upon and so war-scarred that they reject diplomatic ties like what Iran just accepted. You’d have to go back to the Eastern Bloc’s cooperation with Moscow to find something similar.

But what makes this cooperation so incredibly and excitingly “woke” is that it’s between two totally different cultures, religions and ethnicities. It’s truly a meeting of minds, as equals. We could truly go on and on about this aspect, and we should. We should also repeatedly point out that Western liberal democracy demands homogeneity via total submission to their hive mind, whereas socialist democracy protects, accepts and elevates differences and minorities in a consensus-based democracy.

It’s a meeting of two longtime empires whose modern political structures now explicitly forbid empire-building. But that’s a point which stresses the past and looks backward.
This is a meeting of two countries bravely and excitingly looking forward to this new century, whether it’s the 15th (less than two weeks ago the Iranian calendar reached the year 1400), or the 48th (it’s year 4719 in China).
It’s an incredible cooperation, and one so very long in the making.
Part 2 of this article examines how Western media responds to Sino-Iranian unity with hysterics at the prospects of reduced income from the Western imperialism machine. The article is titled: The Iran-China pact is a huge blow for Western imperialists who want war in Asia
(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2021/04/02/648612/Iran-China-deal-

 

[Sineva]

خبرگزاری فارس - چین حاضر به مذاکره با دولت نبود لذا لاریجانی برای پیگیری تفاهم حکم گرفت

مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم گفت: چینی‌ها عنوان کرده بودند حاضر نیستند با دولت ایران به خاطر رفتارش پس از برجام مذاکره کنند، اما آمادگی خود را برای مذاکره با مجموعه نظام اعلام داشتند و علی لاریجانی برای انجام مذاکره با چین حکم گرفت.

www.farsnews.ir

Adviser of the current head of Parliament revealed:
Due to behavior of pro-west reformist government in Iran after JCPOA, China had refused to negotiate with any of them, so Iranian leader had appointed the head of Parliament as the representative of Iran for this strategic agreement.


In a blunt admission, Iranian reformist foreign minister M.J Zarif said "favoring the east is useless"; My guess is because he can't sell the country!

Why-oh-why am I not surprised to hear this....

 

[Khibiny]

Iran will be the largest trade hub and highway in west Asia.

The U.S and Europe can take their nuclear deal and their sanctions and shove them where the sun don't shine.

 

[raptor22]

Yup...China hated this Rohanni government and you will not see any actual contracts until the new Government comes in..then watch out for hundreds of contracts being announced. Iran almost missed the "belt and Road" mega project under this 5th column Rohanni team...the shit that will come out after they are gone!!
چین حاضر به مذاکره با دولت نبود لذا لاریجانی برای پیگیری تفاهم حکم گرفت
مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم گفت: چینی‌ها عنوان کرده بودند حاضر نیستند با دولت ایران به خاطر رفتارش پس از برجام مذاکره کنند، اما آمادگی خود را برای مذاکره با مجموعه نظام اعلام داشتند و علی لاریجانی برای انجام مذاکره با چین حکم گرفت.

منصور حقیقت‌پور در گفت‌وگو با خبرنگار پارلمانی خبرگزاری فارس،‌ با اشاره به اخبار منتشر شده درباره مسؤول مذاکره‌کننده با کشور چین برای امضای تفاهم‌نامه 25 ساله گفت:‌ مقامات دولتی این کشور رسما ناراحتی خود را از رفتار دولت یازدهم و دوازدهم بعد از برجام اعلام کردند.
وی افزود: مقامات چینی عنوان می‌کردند که دولت ایران پس از برجام دولت چین را تحویل نگرفت و در واقع چین را تحقیر کرد و ما حاضر به همکاری با دولت ایران نیستیم ولی اگر «نظام» جمهوری اسلامی می‌خواهد با ما تعامل کند، ما هستیم.
مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم اظهار داشت: مقام معظم رهبری در آن زمان رئیس مجلس وقت [علی لاریجانی]‌ را به عنوان مسؤول پیشبرد سند همکاری با چین می‌کنند و برای وی در این باره حکم صادر و آقای لاریجانی را رسما برای این منظور به مقامات چینی معرفی می‌کنند.
حقیقت‌پور خاطرنشان کرد: مجلس دهم و دوره ریاست آقای لاریجانی بر مجلس به پایان می‌رسد اما آقای لاریجانی در دوره مجلس یازدهم به رهبر معظم انقلاب می‌گوید من دیگر رئیس مجلس نیستم و اجازه بدهید کار را رئیس مجلس وقت ادامه دهد اما رهبر معظم انقلاب قبول نمی‌کنند و می‌گویند که کار را خودت ادامه بده.
وی افزود: در دوره فعلی که آقای لاریجانی رئیس مجلس نیست در مکاتباتی که با چین دارد سمتش را مشاور رهبر انقلاب و مجری پروژه توافق‌نامه 25 ساله عنوان می‌کند.
مشاور رئیس مجلس دهم اظهار داشت: در جاده کمربندی که به صورت ریلی و راه آسفالت در نظر گرفته شده بود و بنا بود قاره‌های آفریقا، آسیا و اروپا را به هم متصل کند و این راه از بیش از 100 کشور عبور می‌کند، که پیش از مذاکرات با چین، ایران در نقشه این راه قرار نداشت اما پس از مذاکراتی که آقای لاریجانی با چینی‌ها داشت مسیر نقشه جاده تغییر کرد و بنا شد این جاده از ایران گذر کند که منافع زیادی را از بُعد تجاری برای ما به همراه دارد.
انتهای پیام/

بنده خدا قرار بود بره اصفهان و شیراز رو ببینه عوضش تو دستشویی گیر کرد به جای 3 روز سفر سر 1 روز برگشت

 

[925boy]

PART II of the PRESSTV article:
The Iran-China pact is a huge blow for Western imperialists who want war in Asia (2/2)

Friday, 02 April 2021 5:44 PM [ Last Update: Friday, 02 April 2021 5:44 PM ]

By Ramin Mazaheri
Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.

In the first part of this article, titled Nixon ‘opened’ China, but only superpower China could ‘open’ Iran, I discussed the historic role reversal: it’s the position of the superpower China which now counts the most, and not the attitude of the United States.
The 25-year Iran-China pact is actually an undercounting as it is essentially — to quote China’s foreign minister — “permanent.” Western media foolishly sees Iran and China as different as apples and bowling balls, and thus they are only taking their first timid step towards understanding how Tehran and Beijing have already broken through the finish line tape.
It’s easy to examine the consternation of the BBC or The New York Times, but I thought it would be interesting to analyze the take of perhaps the top oil trade media, OilPrice, via their article The Iran-China Axis Is A Fast Growing Force In Oil Markets. Part one of this article addressed their take — more consternation, predictably — but it’s necessary to ask: why are even supposedly neutral, objective, rational and profit-oriented business media so bewildered and lost in their analyses of post-1979 Iran and post-1949 China?
The problem for them is that I may be able to grasp an argument based on economics and politics, but it’s hard for me to understand viewing historical developments solely via a lens of fear, paranoia and — above all — a zero-sum view of business, politics and human life. What OilPrice’s article ultimately relies on — like so many others of its ilk — is a hardened intolerance for other non-Western (some today may say “non-White”) cultures.
That type of a fundamentally-emotional and anti-intellectual mindset may motivate many pro-imperialists in Western high finance but they do not motivate Iran and China, two countries whose essentially socialist basis is light-years ahead of the tribalist “identity politics” foolishly held as the ultimate achievement of Western liberal democracy.
This is not a knee-jerk “snowflake” argument — simply look at the starting point of OilPrice and I’m sure you’ll see it is not an unusual foundation for Western media analyses (regardless of the skin tone of the journalist) of Iran: The author immediately claimed in his very first paragraph that Iranians have a “radical view of non-believers,” which is such a radically right-wing view of Iran that it is barely worth an eye roll, much less serious consideration. All that needs to be said is that it’s possible that the author does not know any Christians or Jews, nor does the author have any sincere familiarity with these two fundaments of Islamic thought. Certainly, he has kept far away from Muslims because what he is describing is not anywhere close to the mainstream view held by Muslims in Iran or any other nation where Muslims practice. It’s also a scare tactic, certainly, but the author himself is seemingly scared out of his logic — this is not Iran’s or Islam’s fault, of course.
But what kind of tolerance should be expected from this longtime oil man who, when he looks at the fabulous civilizations of Iran and China, sees only one thing: people who oppose the United States. For the author Iran and China are unmotivated by anything positive, human or redeeming, but instead solely by antipathy towards the United States. Yet whether one reads trade publications like OilPrice or broader Western business publications like The Economist, The Financial Times or Les Echos, this arrogant, fearful and ultimately hostile ideology is blatantly repeated over and over.
Contrarily, Iranian and Chinese businessmen simply wonder why the West refuses to do mutually-beneficial, productive, long-term business? But good, fair business is not what capitalism is — capitalism’s surpluses primarily rely on the savings provided by imperialist plunder, and then the subsequent masking of this reality of stolen resources, stolen wages and thwarted lives and cultures with a tin mass media halo. This is not a radical view of “capitalism with Western characteristics,” but an increasingly accepted view even within the 21st century West.
And this is why it is not surprising that this article on Sino-Iranian bilateral relations takes a lengthy turn into fear mongering over a Chinese take-back of Taiwan. We must remember that this trade publication puts selling oil (at as high a price as possible) above all else — above fair politics, above tolerance of the cultures of other people, above fair business — therefore, OilPrice is always all-too happy to hysterically fearmonger if it can raise the price of oil a buck.
The article mentions the recent and shockingly historic first Joe Biden-era China-US bilateral summit, where China responded to unprecedented diplomatic insults with an unprecedented, lengthy and entirely correct defense of the modern triumvirate I referred to as the “Allies of Sovereignty” — Iran, China and Russia.
Referring to that momentous resetting is entirely correct, but what is not correct is how the author makes the totally spurious claim quite openly that China’s stockpiling of oil — an act which he acknowledged earlier was something that, “it just makes sense for it build inventories” — was actually in preparation for an invasion of Taiwan as early as 2025?
We need to remember when reading their “objective” analyses that this is just what Western business media does: war, for imperialist countries, is a major money-making industry and thus OilPrice and their money-grubbing brethren demonize, stoke fear and cheerlead for policies which are as violent, as expensive and as destructive as possible. Nothing personal — it’s just business media.
This is why readers should remember that the conclusions of such articles are always so predictable: “…the likelihood of some type of oil shortage is becoming increasingly likely,” i.e. the price of oil should be higher than what it is now — which is all that OilPrice really cares about — because geopolitically the world is “a tinder box, that only needs a spark”.
It really isn’t.
As a result of this mutually-beneficial deal China and Iran are way, way, way more stable for the next 25 years.
That’s a good thing, but Western business media is looking for profit and not for good things.
Zarif: Iran-China deal based on win-win approach in pursuit of shared...
West’s weaponization of Iran-China deal to foment war has no chance of succeeding

Iran didn’t give up “too much” because they place their demand for sovereign independence over the best possible business deal — thus they simply must accept paying a premium. The “Allies of Sovereignty” is only three nations, after all. We’ve been living in a pro-globalization world for three decades, and the lack of civic pride makes Iran’s determination even more costly, monetarily.

China has established the indispensable node for its Belt and Road Initiative, from a foreign policy/foreign economic policy perspective, and from a domestic perspective it has assured itself enough energy independence to keep growing as it chooses for the next quarter century.
Is a mutual defense pact between the two next? Frankly, Iran doesn’t need it.
There is zero chance of another Western-orchestrated invasion of Iran, following the victory of the Sacred Defense against Iraq and its Western (and Soviet) axis. Iran has very basic military needs because they aren’t trying to invade anyone, after all. They have achieved military parity in the only arena which matters — its own borders — and a US invasion of Iran would be Vietnam on steroids. There have already been enormous nationwide “no war with Iran” protests in the US — after the assassination of Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani in 2020.
Frankly, China doesn’t need it. Even if they did retake Taiwan the US would blink even faster than they did with Syria. Anyway, the international community has clearly sided with China since 1971 — Taiwan is not a country, nor are they in the United Nations, nor can they even join any UN sub-organizations. Taiwan is a province of China, even if the US thinks it is like the Cuban exile parts of southern Florida — i.e., a permanent place for fascists who lost their civil war to congregate and plot to stall political modernity and peace. Fearmongering about bloody invasion is just a way to sell more guns and oil, and now also a way to distract from this Sino-Iranian victory. It’s absurd: since WWII the West has lost in North Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria but mighty China should be worried?
The pact is what it openly claims it is: a multi-decade diplomatic, military and economic pact of peaceful cooperation. So on its own, it promotes peace. And indirectly, the pact is a major step towards peace and security for the world — from Western aggression. Take on one and you inevitably take on the other, and taking on either would lead to disaster for the Western aggressors. The world can’t allow that, and the world can only embrace the peacemaking Iran-China deal.
China’s “opening” of Iran is historically significant in so many ways to count, including the peaceful stability it helps ensure for the world via drawing two ethnically and religiously different parts of Asia closer together: As I detailed in Part 1 of this article, it is so very excitingly “woke” and modern. In broader terms of human history, its greatest significance is: it’s a victory for socialist democracy and a huge, glaring failure for liberal democracy.

The JCPOA on Iran’s nuclear energy program would never have stopped this Iran-China alliance — Iran would never go fully into the Western camp for at least as long as the rest of the Muslim world is under the West’s thumb — but it could have at least partially counterbalanced it. Now the West is in an even worse bargaining position than before, but who wants the terrible preconditions the West demands for cooperation, and then who even expects the West to actually keep their word? They don’t do diplomacy - they do international piracy, still.

Iran waited a very long time to pick a camp, and yet they have still retained an amount of independence which almost no other nation its size can dream of today. However, as always, to write that China is being welcomed as saviors or without skepticism by Iranians would be a hilarious overstatement. What Iranians cherish most is their independence, and this is enshrined in its political and economic structures post-1979.
Iranian civil servants have chosen a wise path, and it can never be said that they did not genuinely offer the West a diplomatic path. Now their duty is to properly administer the bounty of this cooperation in a way which the Iranian people approve of. The Iranian media will be watching closely, as always.
China’s “opening” of Iran isn’t a threat to Iran, to China nor to any other non- or anti-imperialist nation. It’s only a threat to those who idealize an aristocratic past, or a soulless and ineffectual technocratic present, and to those who insist that Iran and China revert to being as unstable, despondent and unpeaceful as they were prior to their modern, socialist-inspired revolutions.
To such offers Iran and China have permanently responded: “No deal.”
Lastly, this article repeatedly stressed the incredibly animating ideological components at play in this historic international decision. It’s a shame that so many analysts completely disregard modern mankind’s longstanding ideological debates about capitalist or socialist economic practice, the cultural effects of imperialism, and what should be truly classified as “progressive” or “reactionary” politics. There isn’t a new international order, but there is clearly a second international order now on offer — it should be openly compared and contrasted.
(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2021...stern-imperialists-who-want-war-in-Asia-(2-2)

 

[Homajon]

www.worldpoliticsreview.com/amp/articles/29593/the-iran-china-deal-isn-t-all-that

Not "ground-breaking", not "earth-shaking", not "game-changing",....
Just symbolic, nothing more!

 

[mohsen]

No, US sanctions hasn't decreased.

And reformists can die in their skepticism!