Trump Regime’s Persian Gulf Coalition of the Unwilling
When the US goes to war, plans one, or otherwise wants to pressure, bully and/or threaten a nation on its target list for regime change, it seeks coalition partners to present an appearance of legitimacy even though there’s never justification for preemptive hostile actions against another country — a longstanding US specialty.
The Trump regime is struggling to find coalition partners for its anti-Iran agenda in Persian Gulf waters.
After a series of May and June false flag incidents, wrongfully blamed on Iran, Britain’s seizure of an Iranian super-tanker, an act of maritime piracy, Tehran’s interdiction of three vessels near its waters for maritime law breaches, Pompeo and Bolton spent weeks trying build a hostile anti-Iran Persian Gulf coalition.
Despite their usual bullying tactics, they created a virtual coalition of the unwilling, not willing.
Unknown numbers of nations contacted, likely dozens, maybe scores, want no part of the Trump regime’s aim to heighten Middle East tensions more than already, possibly leading to another war in a region already boiling over from US aggression.
The best Pompeo and Bolton came up with so far was getting Britain to agree to allow its two warships already patrolling Persian Gulf waters to join the US mission.
Israel as well joined without sending vessels to the Gulf, offering intelligence alone it provides anyway.
So after after weeks, maybe months of trying, the Trump regime assembled a coalition of one, itself, with minimal help from two partnered countries, what they always offer anyway.
The Pentagon’s Persian Gulf Operation Sentinel designation, a turnoff to US allies for its military connotation, was dropped in favor of no name, hoping the tactic could turn around nations wanting no part of hostile actions against nonbelligerent Iran, threatening no one.
It hasn’t worked. Trump regime hardliners appear especially flustered over 28 of 29 NATO nations declining to join the anti-Iran coalition, notably not France and Germany, both JCPOA signatory countries.
On Thursday, Trump slammed French President Macron for favoring diplomacy with Iran over toughness risking belligerence, tweeting:
“(N)obody speaks for the United States but the United States itself. No one is authorized in any way, shape, or form, to represent us!”
Macron reportedly invited Iranian President Rouhani to meet with Trump during the August 24 – 26 G7 summit in Biarritz, France, a way to ease Middle East tensions, stepping back from the brink of possible conflict.
Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif want no part of meeting with Trump or Pompeo unless the US rejoins the JCPOA and ends its illegal sanctions war on Iran.
The JCPOA is key issue to be discussed by G7 countries in late August. At this stage, the landmark agreement is dead because of the US pullout and EU failure to fulfill its mandated obligations.
G7 talks won’t save it, only a change of policy by Britain, France, Germany and Brussels — not forthcoming since Trump’s May 2018 pullout.
His tweet showed frustration over the failure of his regime to get EU/NATO member states to join his regime’s anti-Iran coalition.
His envoy to Berlin, Richard Grenell, is an undiplomatic right-wing extremist. Earlier he enraged Berlin by suggesting he’s working against governments not going along with hardline Trump regime policies – likely including Germany.
Ambassadors are expected to be politically neutral in their host countries, surely avoiding criticism of their governance, including in other likeminded countries.
Grenell has a long history of undiplomatic comments and actions.
Straightaway as US envoy to Germany, he offended Merkel’s government – telling German companies to cease dealing with Iran, tweeting:
“US Sanctions will target critical sectors of Iran’s economy. German companies doing business in Iran should wind down operations immediately.”
Earlier this week, he was at it again, slamming Berlin for refusing to join the Trump regime’s hostile anti-Iran coalition.
He threatened the relocation of Pentagon forces in Germany to Poland, including over the Merkel government’s military spending — not enough for him and other Trump regime hardliners.
The more they spend, the more sales and profits for US arms and munitions makers. Berlin resents US bullying. It’s unlikely to meet the Trump regime’s military spending demands or join its anti-Iran Gulf coalition it considers a destabilization mission it wants no part of.
Germany also declined to send troops to Syria. It hosts more US forces than other nations except for Japan.
Iran is the Middle East’s leading proponent of peace and stability. Its nuclear program has no military component.
It’s a force for regional stability. If preemptively attacked, it’s powerful enough to hit back hard.
It’s why Pentagon commanders are reluctant to attack the country militarily, knowing the price of US aggression will be high.
Along with world community opposition to war on Iran, the reluctance of Pentagon commanders to go this far may prevent another Middle East conflict — what’s likely to be much more devastating than ongoing regional wars if launched.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”