As we all know, Iran has ties to paramilitary elements such as the Houthi rebels in Yemen and the groups that support President Bashar Assad's regime in Syria. Nowadays, Iran is moving toward the end of nuclear talks with the West on the one hand, and is hampering the democratization of regimes by fuelling sectarian clashes in the Middle East and the Arabian Peninsula on the other.
Soon after the recent developments in Yemen, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said on Sunday that they are "increaingly hopeful" that they will reach an agreement in the nuclear talks with Iran. After arriving in the Swiss city of Lausanne to participate in the nuclear talks that were held between Iran and the P5+1 - the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany -, Hammond stated, "We're here because we believe a deal can be done. It's in everybody's interest that a deal does get done. But it has to be a deal which puts the bomb beyond Iran's reach - there can't be any compromise about that." Concerning the nuclear talks, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini also said, "[We have] never been closer to a deal, there are still some critical points to be solved," in Lausanne. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier remarked that they were close to the endgame after 10-12 years of negotatiaons, comparing the job with climbing to the top of snowcapped Swiss Alps.
Obviously, bringing the nuclear talks to a desired end is as hard as climbing the Alps, but it is not confined to this when Iran's central role is taken into consideration. Iran turns frozen conflict areas in its region into hot conflict areas and ensures the exsitence of the status quo by creating instability in the region.
Let us get to the bottom of the Iranian economy in order to explain this double situation. After the Iranian Revolution in 1979, the whole wealth of the country, including factories and mines, was transferred to foundations that were held by mullahs. Former agents of the Committee for State Security (KGB) in Russia also became oligarchs with such spoils. Currently, the Rafsanjani family is the richest family in Iran and Iran's rich copper mines are the cash cow of this family. Mohsen Rafighdoost, who was the guard to Ruhollah Khomeini and was in charge of one of the largest foundations in Iran, was appointed as the minister of the Revolutionary Guards by Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and then took the helm of a network that oversaw all strategic sectors, including construction and pharmaceutical industries, with a turnover of billions of dollars.
One cannot enter markets in Iran without paying tribute to such monopolies that control these structures. It is not a secret that the unrecorded wealth of these foundations (monopolies) in Iran exceeds Iran's national income, since they have nonmarket exemptions and immunities. Iran's autarchic economy is essentially a monopoly economy, which is overseen by the Iranian bureaucratic oligarchy. Of course, mullah oligarchs who control these monopolies also have billions of dollars of investments in global funds and capitals. In brief, today, Iran is a country that can be considered as the resource of unrecorded financial oligarchy.
At this juncture, let us ask the following questions: Even if there is no embargo, could there be inflation, unemployment and poverty in such a looting order? What is the difference between the mullah oligarchy that uses the religion as a shield and the shah's oligarchy? In 1979, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi wanted to make Iran a country that would dominate the economy of the region by exporting oil, however his desire was hampered by the Iranian Revolution, which was led by Khomeini. Today, Iran's oil operating capacity is no more advanced than that of 1979, but it allocates billions of dollars for armament and the development of nuclear weapons.
The fact that the Iranian Revolution has moved away from the motives that drove it and turned into a dictatorship cannot be explained with Islam's political aspect. The communists, liberals and other social segments who revolted against the Shah's oppression were eliminated by Shiite mullahs after the revolution. The Iranian revolution turned into a dictatorship that walked on a single foot.
Those who continued the Iranian Revolution opted for a path that was the opposite of Islam. This path was desired by the U.S. which had determined it in 1977, just two years before the revolution. When the Shah went to the U.S. in 1977 to receive support for a liberal initiative in Iran, then U.S. President Jimmy Carter said that it was too late and the U.S.'s support to Iran was no longer possible. At that time, the U.S. had already planned the establishment of a neo-nationalist and Shiite dictatorship by making Khomeini return to Iran from Paris. Knowing that the end of the Shah was near, the U.S. wanted to control the revolution. The only way to achive this was that Khomeini would return from exile with the promise of "democracy," which would turn into a small, neo-nationalist and bourgeois democracy to be relatively overseen by the U.S, and things happened as desired by the U.S. We know the powers that back Iran today. The secterian wars that are triggered by German-centric European reactionism and the U.S.-centric neocon fascism and led by Iran are like a new Balkanization policy. Be sure of that such a policy will not work this time, because Turkey, region and the world are far from their states in the 1990s.