TEHRAN- The British think tank Unherd published a story on November 6 outlining a roadmap for the Biden administration to increase pressure on Iran and save the shaky Israel. 

The analysis, written by Edward Luttwak, started with a briefing on the Iranian foreign minister’s talks with his Turkish counterpart. It then pointed the finger at some White House staff and ended up offering suggestions over halting Iran’s oil supply. 

In the analysis, the Biden administration was sarcastically labeled as incompetent to push Iran to the corner; also, the cabinet was criticized for widening the gap between Washington and Tel Aviv.

A trip down memory lane reveals that U.S. presidents have done their best to keep the Israeli regime running a few more days as if every U.S. president is mandated to help sustain the Zionist regime.

Biden has followed in the footsteps of his predecessors 

Upon the start of the Hamas operation on October 7, Biden promised further support for Israel, so Washington provided political, military, and financial support for Tel Aviv, which is the United States’ arm in West Asia. 

Labeled as “appeaser in chief” by John Bolton on October 15, the self-proclaimed Zionist Biden once again underlined the importance of the Israeli regime in West Asia through his one-day visit from Tel Aviv on October 18, just a day after the bombardment of Al Ahli hospital in northern Gaza which left at least 500 Palestinians martyred.

Luttwak criticized some White House officials for their Iran policy, yet during Biden’s tenure no sanction has been lifted and there has been no appeasement toward Iran.

Biden, who is said to be interested in the JCOPA revival, has followed Trump’s Iran policy.

The U.S. exited the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in May 2018 in a bid to put further pressure on Iran.

In an exclusive interview with CBN on 23 June 2020, Trump said: “Probably the biggest thing I did for Israel was Iran, breaking up that horrible deal made by President Obama $150 billion, $1.8 billion in cash.” 

A common tactic among U.S. presidents is to play the blame game, accusing their predecessors of ignoring Israel. However, reliable documents trace Washington's longstanding support for Tel Aviv.

Back in September 2016, Washington and Tel Aviv signed a military aid package worth $38 billion, which was the largest aid package in U.S. history.
The deal, billed by Barak Obama, was promised to be paid within a decade. It allowed Washington’s chief West Asia ally to upgrade most of its fighter aircraft, its ground forces’ mobility, and its missile defense systems.

Accusing U.S. presidents of negligence towards Israel is a popular topic during election campaigns, however, it remains a priority for the White House to allocate more money to Israel from American taxpayers.  

America’s inhumane stance

In line with the policy to halt Iran’s progress, this time, Luttwak came up with a suggestion for exerting more pressure on Iran’s oil supply.

“Starve the beast by intercepting oil exports on the high seas,” said the author, calling for interception of the oil tankers carrying Iran’s oil.

The action, according to the author, would lead to increased food prices, deprivation, and outright hunger.

“Starving” is the key word that was once uttered by the former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in November 2018. He said, “Iran must listen to the U.S. if they want their people to eat”.      
Putting barriers in Iran’s oil supply is not a new strategy. It is within Washington’s policy to halt Iran’s oil supply.
    
Such a cruel stance, which is stated by U.S. officials, further outlines Washington’s worry over the shaky Israel’s du jour condition.

Growing worries over Israel’s survival

Preserving U.S. interests, Israel is a top priority for the White House. Any threat to Tel Aviv is considered a threat to Washington.

In fact, the real threat to the Zionist regime is the spread of the Islamic Revolution’s discourse. 

The Tawhidic perspective and independence are two main factors that the Islamic Revolution and resistance have in common.

In the resistance lexicon, there is no word like “surrender”. 

Metaphorically, the Americans and Zionists are afraid of the resistance rockets on the one hand, and the spread of revolutionary concepts on the other. The former targets the military barracks, and the latter targets the essence of oppression and injustice.