TEHRAN - William O. Beeman, who served as the professor of Eastern Studies at the Brown University of Rhode Islands, says “the United States fears expanded Iranian military, security and economic influence” in the Persian Gulf region.

Professor Beeman who has written more than 100 research articles about the culture, history, politics and sociology of Iran tells the Tehran Times that Washington sees Iran as a “challenge” to its presumed security order in the Persian Gulf.
The United States seems to be asserting itself as the principal guarantor of security in the Persian Gulf and wants only itself and Israel in the region.
This is the text of the interview:
Q: Generally speaking, when was the idea of “security system for the Persian Gulf” put forward?
A: ?The withdrawal of the British in 1971 from the Persian Gulf frightened the United States. This was during the Cold War and the United States was actually afraid that the Soviet Union would invade Iran and thereby secure a warm-water port and access to the region's oil supplies. After this, the United States established the “Twin Pillars” policy where Iran was one 'pillar"" and Saudi Arabia the other.
Q: How was the security order in the Persian Gulf shaped since Britain left the region in 1971?
A: The United States then sold arms to both Iran and Saudi Arabia. OPEC increased the price of oil, creating turmoil in the oil markets, but essentially leading to American and European consumers paying for the arms through the increased oil profits. ?
Q: What was the effect of Islamic revolution in Iran on the security order in the Persian Gulf?
A: ?One of the ""Twin Pillars"" was lost and this sent the United States into panic. The Cold War was still active, and the United States was frightened that the Soviet Union would take advantage of this. Iran's slogan ""Neither East nor West"" was also disturbing to the United States, because Iran was no longer on ""our side"".

Q: Has there been any change in U.S. definition of security order in the Persian Gulf since the collapse of the Saddam regime in Iraq?
A: ?Yes, the United States was able to establish a military presence in Saudi Arabia and a port for the United States Sixth Fleet in Bahrain. Thus the United States has taken over security of the Persian Gulf itself rather than relying on Saudi Arabian or Iranian proxies. ?
?This was the role the British played in the Persian Gulf before 1971.?
Q: Can the U.S. definition of security in the Persian Gulf guarantee the security of its regional allies?
A: ?This is a hard question to answer, but my opinion is that the United States seems to be asserting itself as the principal guarantor of security in the Persian Gulf. The United States appears to want there to be only two principal powers in the region, the United States and Israel. Iran is a challenge to this security order. All the talk about ""Iranian hegemony"" really means that the United States fears expanded Iranian military, security and economic influence in the region?.
Q: The U.S. emphasizes the security of its allies in the region, but the elements threatening the security of its allies are mainly domestic. How can the U.S. resolve this contradiction?
A: ?This is a continual dilemma in American politics. In a world where the ""nation-state"" is the basic unit of government, the United States is wary of trying to operate on a sub-state level. Of course it has done this many times in Iraq, Afghanistan and in combating ISIS/ISIL/DAESH. But in the case of Bahrain, for example, the United States appears to be more interested in protecting its crucial naval base there than worrying about the beleaguered Shi'a population there, or defying its ally, Saudi Arabia, in dealing with the Houthi in Yemen.

*******Highlight******
The United States appears to be more interested in protecting its crucial naval base in Bahrain than worrying about the beleaguered Shi'a population there, or defying its ally, Saudi Arabia, in dealing with the Houthi in Yemen. ?