US after neocolonialism in Mideast: Pundit

Press TV has conducted an interview with Soraya Sepahpour Ulrich, an independent researcher and writer in Tehran, about remarks by Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei on the US and its ambitions to annihilate regional resistance movements and dominate Syria and Iraq.

What follows is a rough transcription of the interview.

Press TV: You heard the Leader’s statements. Let’s begin with how he has said the US is seeking the annihilation of regional resistance movements and total dominance over Syria and Iraq.

Ulrich: I believe that Ayatollah Khamenei is absolutely right and infinitely wise. That is exactly what the West is attempting to do, led by the United States; and in fact in post 9/11, when the United Nations Security Council passed resolution 1373, without defining terrorism, it gave America the means and a way forward to project itself as fighting terrorism but in fact we know, even from top Pentagon officials, that they are responsible for creating Daesh and they knew what was going to take place, but as long as they have terrorists on the ground in these countries that Mr. Khamenei mentioned, then the United States has a pretext of not only deploying boots there but pretending that they are fighting terrorists. So I really believe that the whole world must be alerted to this and join the war on terror on the right side, to be on the side of the victims not those who are sponsoring terrorism for their own gains to destroy Iraq, Syria and now Yemen.

Press TV: Ever since this nuclear conclusion that has been reached between Iran and the world powers, which includes obviously the United States, there has been repeated statements coming from the US when there has been talk of the nuclear conclusion, in which it has accused Iran of supporting terrorism and based on what you have said it seems like that is reversed but yet what we see on the ground is what indeed you have said: the support of terrorism coming from the US in particular. Why then does it accuse Iran of terrorism?  

Ulrich: It is very interesting. I am very glad that you asked that question. In fact terrorism has well over one hundred definitions, but regardless of the definitions, they all come to one conclusion, and that is the deliberate coercion and harming of civilians to take forward the policies of intimidating a government, and even the United States Code 2331 describes terrorism as a deliberate coercion and a means to force a government to do its bidding.

A United Nations panel in 2004 even said that terrorism is a deliberate harming of civilians and non-combatants to force a government to abide by a given policy; and Iran - 80 million Iranians are victims of terrorism, of sanctioned terrorism, which are the sanctions - and yet they have the audacity to say that Iranians are supporting terrorists and unfortunately because they have such a hold on global media, they are able to project their own definition of terrorism and we are led to believe that if a plane goes into a building or if Daesh cut somebody’s head off, that is terrorism, it must have an immediate impact and it must have blood and carnage. Yet there is nothing being portrayed in the media of the million Iraqis that died because of sanctioned terrorism, and we do not even have a number of how many Iranians have been the victims of sanctioned terrorism, which is sanctions-licensed terrorism.

So to call Iran a supporter of terrorism and to impose sanctions on Iran or sanctioned terrorism for supporting terrorism is irony at its best. It is just inconceivable.

Press TV: US Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday from Philadelphia spoke about Iran’s nuclear conclusion at length and again he talked about Iran in terms of being the supporter of terrorism but he took a step further reminiscent of what the US ambassador to the UN said, which is almost a doomsday scenario that Iran is just really this power that is a threat to humanity. It painted Iran in those terms and it said we are going to support our Persian Gulf allies, we are going to support Israel and all of the support was in form of military hardware, and yet at the same time it says Iran might come aboard in terms of some of the policies we have in the region. Those are very mixed signals coming from the US vis-à-vis Iran. 

Ulrich: They are indeed and I think that Iran is wise not to want to engage with parties or to conclude a deal with the parties that are committing terrorism against it, and to label Iran as supporting terrorists enables America to tighten further sanctions.

So while it may want to release some of the sanctions that are nuclear-related, it can increase sanctions against the people of Iran, it can sanction more terrorism based on these lies, and I do not know how Iran would be able to work side by side with terrorists when ever since the Islamic Revolution, in fact, Iran has been a defender of the oppressed. 

Press TV: It really does not read when it comes to the policies that Iran has in the region and what the US has and obviously some of the statements made by Iran’s Leader is reflective of that, and yet there is this nuclear conclusion that has been made. What is the extent of the relationship that will be happening between Iran and the US when it comes to the nuclear conclusion?

Ulrich: Well that really remains to be seen, but we hear that American policymakers and military officials even bragging that they will have boots and people on the ground so when the time comes that they want to attack Iran, it would make it easier.

Now they cannot be feigning diplomacy and drawing up war plans and they are on the opposite sides of the pole. I mean Iran has suffered greatly and resisted greatly imperialism and bullying because it understands in depth the value of sovereignty and independence, whereas what America wants to do in the region is the exact opposite. It wants to either occupy with boots on the ground, pretending to fight terrorism or it wants to establish neocolonialism.

So they are so far apart in their ideology, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the West led by the United States, that even if a nuclear conclusion is regarded as favorable by both Iranians and the West, they cannot possibly agree on what America’s plans for the region and what Iran hopes to lead and demonstrate that resistance is possible and there is no way that the two can join forces. I do not foresee it that way.

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.co.uk