Tehran's ability is not to cross the "red lines"

Beyond the recent celebrations and the commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. The Iranian regime does not have much to celebrate, let alone after several EU officials have said that Iran is "a threat to regional stability".

Last week, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, He expressed his support for supporting the badessment of Iranian behavior as "unacceptable". At the same time, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, insists that Iran must comply with UN resolutions and close its ballistic missile project. However, the EU's policy vis-à-vis Iran, baduming that such a thing exists, is full of contradictions.

The EU spokesman for foreign policy, Federica MogheriniHe spent most of his energy managing as a lobby for the Islamic Republic. She has visited more than 30 countries to present the Islamic Republic as a weak lamb facing the great American wolf.

To show the special place that the regime occupies in his heart, when he is in Tehran, Mogherini dons the Khomeinist hijab, but when he visits other Islamic capitals, he unties his blond hair, these behaviors are gone so far from the EU spokesman. , that in private, the officials of the Europeans make fun of it for such infantile symbolism. However, the problem is that symbolism is as important in politics as in poetry. Thus, a few weeks after the end of his duties, the German Foreign Minister, Sigmar Gabriel, chairs a delegation of European businessmen in Tehran and praises the Islamic Republic as a stone of stability in the Middle East, as well as some Khomeinist leaders, see it as an invaluable support for Teheran.

For nearly two years, the EU has created – in a negative way – in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the illusion of being able to continue doing what it likes without paying any negative consequences. When the Trump government unveiled a series of measures to compel Tehran to change certain aspects of its behavior, the EU rejected the US position, but followed all the sanctions imposed by Washington on Iran. At the same time, the EU has tasked a team to find ways to get around these same penalties. This duality, not to say a false duplicity, led to the creation of an "alternative system of commercial financial transactions" to help the Islamic Republic to sell its oil to Europe and to buy goods and services. European services.

The idea that the Islamic Republic deserves special treatment was invented by the former President of the United States, Barack Obama. He created a parallel United Nations Security Council called the 5 + 1 group. The idea was to allow Tehran to disregard six UN Security Council resolutions that it did not like. Obama has also ignored the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exempting Iran from its terms and evoking the "Comprehensive Global Action Plan" (CJPOA) which states clearly that it is designed custom made only for Iran. The special treatment reserved for the Islamic Republic by the European Union includes the silencing of the more than 20 EU citizens currently held hostage in Tehran. This is also reflected in the simple rapid reaction of Europeans to the latest terrorist operations of the Islamic Republic in four European countries. Ironically, a more credible expose of the destructive role played by the Islamic Republic in Europe comes from Tehran's former ambbadador to Berlin, Ali Majedi.

Majedi is neither a deserter nor a dissident. He is back in Tehran at the end of his mission in Berlin, where he begins to retire. However, he told reporters in Tehran that he had found that Europeans had "ample evidence" of "destructive activities" from Iran that could not be attributed to "unruly elements" of Tehran .

Europeans, including British Foreign Minister Jeremy Hunt, believe that by "working with Iran" they could prevent the Islamic Republic from "crossing the red lines". The problem is that the Islamic Republic does not cross these real or imaginary "red lines".

As in the former Soviet Union, the strategy of the Islamic Republic is to cross only the "pink lines", which make up 99% of international behavioral standards, to the extent possible. The Islamic Republic of Iran has no troops in Yemen, but manages to maintain this tragedy by helping the Houthi rebels cling to the territory they own.

The last Iranian military advisers have left Iraq, but they left behind thousands of Iraqi soldiers who had been living in Iran for decades and had dual nationality to lead militias in favor of Tehran. On the other hand, Iran is the one who sets the tone in Beirut, but not through Iranian troops, but by recruiting local workers from all communities, especially the Shia community, through the Hezbollah political-terrorist group .. Of Tehran's approximately 80,000 troops in Syria, less than 10 per cent are Iranians, mostly mercenaries from a dozen countries, including Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria itself, but are supported and paid for by Iran. 'Iran.

The Islamic Republic has not crossed any red line in Afghanistan, but has engaged thousands of armed men belonging to all communities.and more recently, this has also been the case with the Taliban. In the EU countries, Tehran is careful not to go beyond the "red lines". But, he crosses the "pink lines" whenever he can through mosques and charitable organizations, religious donations and charitable works used as facades. In Britain alone, the Islamic Republic controls at least a dozen "tax-exempt" charities, which are often used to finance terrorist groups around the world or simply to be used for money laundering. 39; money. Part of the EU's weak spot for the Islamic Republic may be inspired by the endemic anti-Americanism present in most European political circles, from left to right.

We saw an example of this latent anti-Americanism a few weeks ago when, because of the crisis in Venezuela, the members of the Organization of American States (OAS) unanimously rejected Nicolás Maduro's claim to the presidency and supported Juan Guaido. as interim president of Venezuela, EU officials and various media have tried to show this as another example of how the United States was interfering in Venezuela's internal affairs.

Therefore, they started by saying that they would not follow this policy. However, once aware that the anti-Maduro front covered almost all of America and was not a maneuver of President Donald Trump, they used the duplicity to cover up their mistake and offered Maduro eight days to organize new presidential elections. risk that the EU supports Guaido's badertion as an OAS. It was obvious that Maduro would not accept what would amount to admitting the legitimacy of his presidency. It was obvious that elections could not be organized in eight days. It was also obvious that even if elections were organized by an illegitimate regime, they would have no legitimacy. Even in this case, the anti-American demagoguery of the EU has once again shown its ridiculous policy.

Whether in Venezuela, as in business with the Islamic Republic in Iran, The European Union must choose if it eliminates its anti-American prisms that are used today to see the reality or if it continues to collide directly with the ridiculousthere are no more options, no time.