News Right Now: The Balancing Act

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu. Welcome to News Right Now - The Balancing Act

In another move of political showmanship, US President Donald Trump recently announced that buyers of Iranian oil must stop all purchases by May 1st, or risk sanctions. The move, took many market participants by surprise, ending six months of waivers which had allowed the biggest buyers of Iranian crude oil to continue to import limited volumes. Not to be outdone, the Iranian government renewed its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, often described as the most crucial "choke point" in the global energy supply chain. The threat prompted fears about the ramifications on oil prices and broader financial markets.

True to form, the US's agents in the region, namely Saudi Arabia offered to ramp up oil production to provide quote "ample supply and a balanced market". Tensions have risen between Tehran and Washington since the Trump administration withdrew a year ago from a 2015 international nuclear deal with Iran and began ratcheting up sanctions to throttle the Islamic Republic’s economy. But reading between the lines tells a very different story. Iran deceitfully plays the dual role of both bogeyman and enforcer in the Middle East, creating a balance of power that prevents a regional superpower from imposing its will on its neighbors.

For example, the US would not have been able to invade Afghanistan in 2001 without tacit approval from Iran. As another example, after the US invaded Iraq in 2003, it relied on Iran to quell the Shia insurgency against the US in the south of Iraq. This allowed the US to focus its efforts on the Sunni insurgency in central Iraq. In this way, it is a willing enforcer of US policy.

In yet another example, Iran also acts as a bogeyman, keeping both the Saudi's in line, and serving as a deterrent to the ambitions of the Zionist state, all of which coincides with US policy in the region.

Lastly, since the US had no viable alternative to Bashar al-Assad in Syria, it allowed the Iranian government to use its military and influence to support Bashar in Syria. Despite their talk of quote "red-lines", the US would rather have Bashar in power as opposed to a sincere Islamic leadership that could reshape the region.

So both the US and Iran, despite their harsh words for each other, benefit from the drama and theatrics between them. It’s a balancing act designed to achieve specific policy outcomes in the region.

It’s sad to see that a regime that supposedly is the successor of an “Islamic” revolution in 1979 could so willingly put its own national and sectarian interests above those of the Ummah - despite the fact that Islam prohibits sectarianism and nationalism. If a state were to assume power, with a true Islamic political vision, it could easily exert itself in the region, uniting the Muslims, utilizing their resources, and expelling the neocolonial influence from the Islamic lands. If the Iranian leadership had committed to implementing the detailed Shar’ii rulings, then they would have been prevented from cooperating with the disbelieving imperialist through legal injunction. Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an:

(وَلَن يَجْعَلَ اللّهُ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ سَبِيلاً)

“Allah will never allow the disbelievers to have a way over the believers”
(an-Nisa: 141)

Jazakum Allah khairan for joining us. Wassalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu.