The China-Iran Deal: Khamenei's Grand Vision

 

After losing Qassem Soleimani, Ayatollah Khamenei decided that if his regime is to collapse, it will be Chinese Communism, not US democracy, that inherits Iran.

Although the signed Nuclear Deal of 2015 initially gave Iran sanctions relief, the arrival of President Donald Trump snapped US sanctions back into place and returned the two nations to previous levels of hostility. As tensions escalated, the United States largely abstained from retaliation - until assassinating Qassem Soleimani, the man largely perceived to be second-in-command of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The assassination was embarrassing for the Islamic Republic. It has had a catastrophic impact on Iran's ability to retain influence in Iraq and might additionally see the end of the current Iran-friendly administration in Lebanon. To make matters worse: Qassem Soleimani was the most popular figure of the Islamic Republic - with him gone, the Iranian people will be more hostile than ever towards the regime. On all fronts, the US is defeating Iran.

But earlier this year a draft of a comprehensive strategic partnership between China and Iran was leaked to the international press. Though condemned by many in Iran's political sphere, it is unlikely to be the work of Hassan Rouhani, the Iranian President. It is far more likely to have been designed by the true authority, Ayatollah Khamenei, because for the Ayatollah, if Iran must compromise, it cannot and will not compromise with the murderers of Qassem Soleimani. Instead, it will compromise with China, another regime almost as hellbent on destroying America as Iran.

Increasingly, Iran and China are likely to work as strategic partners in all matters US-related. Particularly concerning for the US is the potential for the Taliban to join this Chinese-Iranian axis. Such an outcome would erupt Afghanistan into flames after the withdrawal of US forces. The United States would be forced to return to Afghanistan within a couple years, as with Iraq in 2014, and the US would be sufficiently distracted while Iran and China make consolidations elsewhere.

Although stoking the flames in Afghanistan is ideal for China, it would further the risk of war between Iran and the US. That said, it is very unlikely that President Donald Trump would ever go to war with Iran - but under the new strategic partnership, Iran is much more likely to be forced by China into fully supporting the Taliban and completely rejecting the US-backed Afghan government, which would force the US and Iran into yet another dangerous war by proxy.

In return, China would likely support an Iran-Hezbollah-backed coup on Lebanon. As mentioned in a previous article, as the economic situation in Lebanon gets worse, it becomes increasingly likely that Hezbollah will end up ruling the Arab nation. With Chinese support behind Iran and Hezbollah; with Afghanistan in flames and with Taiwan at increasing risk of Chinese invasion, there would be little appetite from the US to wage war with Hezbollah in Lebanon:

https://jwaveruspolitics.blogspot.com/2020/08/bankrupt-lebanon-to-be-ruled-by.html 

In spite of the mutual benefits for both China and Iran, Iran's independence will eventually be eroded and China will become the dominant partner. Yet even should the Islamic Republic be overthrown, their creed, "death to America, death to Israel" will live on in an Iran ruled by Chinese Communism.

Bankrupt Lebanon to be ruled by Hezbollah - analysis

It is no secret that the Syrian Arab Army occupied Lebanon for 29 years. But Hezbollah and Iran actively participating in the Syrian Civil War ensures that Syria will not return to Lebanon - Hezbollah and Iran, however, will.

In 1976 during the brutal Lebanese civil war, the Syrian Arab Army sent a large occupying force into Lebanon to stabilize the situation. Even after the civil war's completion in 1990, the Syrian government kept military control of Lebanon for the next 15 years, greatly frustrating certain elements of Lebanon's political apparatus until Syria's withdrawal in 2005.

But the Syrian Civil War (2011 - present) has changed the strategic calculus. Hezbollah, an important part of the unofficial Lebanese political-military structure, joined the Syrian Arab Army in an attempt to prevent the collapse of the Syrian government. After Russian involvement turned the tide in favour of President Assad, Hezbollah wielded an enormous amount of influence in both Syria and Lebanon.

To challenge this emerging strategic threat, the Trump Administration has prevented Lebanon from receiving any further economic bailouts until they first sever ties with Hezbollah. This has greatly exacerbated an already unstable economic condition. More than this, however: it has sowed the seeds of animosity between Lebanon and Hezbollah. Such animosity within Lebanon already started to show after Hezbollah took a side in the Syrian Civil War. In the eyes of the Arab world, this turned Hezbollah from an anti-Israeli organization into an anti-Sunni Muslim organization. Economic crises which can be directly blamed on Hezbollah threatens to bring the organization and the Lebanese people to breaking point.

All of this changes Hezbollah's calculus considerably. Israel is already putting pressure on all Iran-affiliated militias to not settle on Syria's Israeli border - should Lebanon go bankrupt, military might may indeed once again occupy Lebanon - but not the weakened Syrian Arab Army. Hezbollah's influence in Syria may indeed have bought it legitimacy from the Syrian government to act on its behalf and stabilize Lebanon militarily.

For Hezbollah to militarily occupy all of Lebanon, it would need to at least partially - if not completely - withdraw from Syria. For Iran, a withdrawal of Hezbollah from Syria could be part of a larger deal with Russia: Hezbollah hands over its control of Syria to Russia, on the condition of Russian support for a Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon.

Though a Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon does pose a significant risk to Israel, for the Trump Administration it would legitimize its maximum pressure strategy on Iran and help reveal to more of the Arab world just how malevolent Iranian influence is in the region. The takeover of Lebanon would, additionally, further weaken Iranian influence in Iraq - which is one of the Trump Administration's top priorities - as Iraqis would respond with fury, fearing the same thing would happen in Iraq at the hands of the Popular Mobilization Forces.

All of this would mean that the Trump Administration's top priority concerning Iran - weakening Iran's hold on Iraq - would be accomplished. Hezbollah's occupation of Lebanon may indeed signal the beginning of the end of Iranian influence in Iraq, and force Iran to consolidate its power in Lebanon and Syria at Iraq's expense.

For the Lebanese people, however, misery would ensue. A Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon would be under crippling sanctions, and with the likely loss of Baghdad to ensue, Iran's new centre of influence in the Arab world would be Lebanon and Beirut, and Hassan Nasrallah would become the Arab equivalent of Ayatollah Khomeini.

China, Iran and Afghanistan to collide: Trump's great test

Animosity between China and the United States has provided a much-needed lifeline for Iran. Further, increased Sino-Iranian cooperation could be disastrous for US policy in Afghanistan.

Until 2020, relations between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and the Trump Administration had been strained but respectful. The two superpowers found common ground on North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq and on an emerging trade deal. But the global pandemic of Covid-19 effectively destroyed US-Sino relations, and have the potential to throw the two superpowers into a Second Cold War.

But Hong Kong, Taiwan and the South China Sea are not the only arenas likely to be impacted by a Second Cold War. Iran is perhaps the United States' most imminent threat to its vision for the Middle-East, and China has important reasons to strike a strategic alliance with Iran, even at the risk of losing oil revenue from Gulf states like Saudi Arabia.

Apart from vengeance against the Trump Administration, the other crucial reason for increased Sino-Iranian relations would be to erode Indian influence. India has enjoyed warm relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran but is an adversary of China. China cutting into India's relations with Iran would be a big blow, as India would be locked out of the wider Central Asian market and forced to side with the US' belligerency towards Iran.

For Iran, too, the calculus with the United States has changed. Before 2020, Iran resisted US pressure but was ultimately likely to strike a new nuclear deal in order to survive economically. But with the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, Iran's prestige suffered a severe blow and a deal with the US has become too humiliating to stomach. Should Donald Trump get reelected, as is likely, Iran would rather strike a deal with Xi's China than with the Trump Administration.

In the event of reelection, China and Iran would be desperate to strike back, and this desperation makes them both likely to explore possible avenues of cooperation with the Taliban. After 2 and a half years of negotiation, the United States has recently concluded a peace deal with the Taliban. The US is to withdraw from Afghanistan and, in exchange, the Taliban has pledged not to let its territory be used for terrorist attacks and has pledged to negotiate with the Afghan government.

Should the Taliban uphold their end of the deal, the United States would withdraw its troops over a 14 month period. During this period, the Taliban are very much likely to comply with US demands and reject any overtures from Iran or China. Yet at the conclusion of these 14 months, the Taliban is likely to agree to Iranian and Chinese overtures, and the mutual benefit would be considerable to all three parties involved.

In this scenario, the US would be forced to return to Afghanistan and be too busy dealing with high levels of instability to turn its military might on Iran or China. It would be comparable to US reentry into Iraq in 2014. Should the US use Pakistan as a conduit into Afghanistan, China would be able to spy on the US through Pakistan and gain a further advantage in the Second Cold War, possibly forcing the United States to look for more expensive routes into Afghanistan.

A Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan would be a great test for President Trump. It would test his ability to find alternate solutions to the Afghan crisis, test his willingness to work with the Taliban, test how far he is willing to punish Iran and China for exacerbating the crisis and, finally, test whether he would strike a deal with a country like Russia to stabilize Afghanistan once and for all.