Andrew Korybko
Non-nuclear Iran is incapable of
existentially threatening the US like nuclear-armed Russia could
Politico cited
a senior Senate aid and two sources in the Biden Administration to report on
Wednesday that the US is much more afraid of an uncontrollable escalation
sequence with Russia than with Iran due to the first’s nuclear capabilities. As
proof of this, the US has no qualms about shooting down Iranian missiles
launched against Israel but won’t consider shooting down Russian ones launched
against Ukraine, which has upset Zelensky and some of his compatriots who thus
feel like second-class allies.
The difference between
Russia/Ukraine and Iran/Israel in this regard accounts for the US’ different
approach towards each pair. As was explained last month in this analysis about
why “Putin Explicitly Confirmed What Was Already Self-Evident About Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine”, the comparatively more pragmatic policymakers who still have the
final say in Russia and the US have thus far managed to avoid the
uncontrollable escalation sequence that their respective hawkish rivals want.
Here’s how they did it:
“[The US hawks’]
comparatively more pragmatic rivals who still call the shots always signal
their escalatory intentions far in advance so that Russia could prepare itself
and thus be less likely to ‘overreact’ in some way that risks World War III.
Likewise, Russia continues restraining itself from replicating the US’
‘shock-and-awe’ campaign in order to reduce the likelihood of the West
‘overreacting’ by directly intervening in the conflict to salvage their
geopolitical project and thus risking World War III.
It can only be speculated whether this interplay is due to each’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (‘deep state’) behaving responsibly on their own considering the enormity of what’s at stake or if it’s the result of a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’. Whatever the truth may be, the aforesaid model accounts for the unexpected moves or lack thereof from each, which are the US correspondingly telegraphing its escalatory intentions and Russia never seriously escalating in kind.”
There’s no equivalent balance
of nuclear power between the US and Iran, with the most that Iran can do is
launch saturation strikes against American bases in the region, not
existentially threaten it like Russia can. If Iran’s potential retaliation to
Israel’s expected strike harms or kills some of the nearly 100-member team operating the US’ THAAD in the self-professed Jewish
State, then the US could either take the hit, retaliate against Iranian-aligned
Resistance groups in the region, or strike the Islamic Republic.
Regardless of whatever might happen, non-nuclear Iran is incapable of existentially threatening the US like nuclear-armed Russia could if the latter retaliated to the interception of its missiles by hitting targets inside of NATO, which could easily catalyze a possibly apocalyptic escalation sequence. To be sure, there are indeed some US hawks who want to risk that scenario and the abovementioned comparatively less consequential one in West Asia, but their more pragmatic rivals are still able to stop them for now.
Andrew
Korybko, Substack,
October 17, 2024
Korybko To The Media Line: Russia Has Pragmatic Reasons For Partnering With The Taliban
A Forbes Contributor Fears That A Ceasefire Will Lead To A Pro-Russian Fascist Coup In Ukraine
Poland’s “Ukrainian Legion” Flopped
WaPo Detailed The New Tactics Responsible For Russia’s Latest Successes In Donbass
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Não publicamos comentários de anônimos/desconhecidos.
Por favor, se optar por "Anônimo", escreva o seu nome no final do comentário.
Não use CAIXA ALTA, (Não grite!), isto é, não escreva tudo em maiúsculas, escreva normalmente. Obrigado pela sua participação!
Volte sempre!
Abraços./-