White House miscalculation, confusion on Iran
Tehran, Some American analysts and media refer to the approaches of US president Donald Trump on Iran as an indication of the White House's entire confusion which is the evidence for the misunderstanding of developments or the miscalculation of former experiences.
A rocket attack on Baghdad's Green Zone and the damage to a building near the US embassy in the city once again led to a variety of analysis on the growing tensions between Tehran and Washington. On the other hand, some media outlets also are questioning the nature of the attacks, and they call it the 'B Team plot which is attempting to wage a war in the Middle East.
At the top of this group are some advisers of Donald Trump and Saudi and Emirati rulers along with the Zionist officials whose ultimate demand is the USIranian military confrontation.
Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif warned in a statement to President of the United States about the plotting of some people in Washington and the Middle East on Monday. In fact, with this message, he implicitly denied any Iranian involvement in a missile strike on Baghdad's Green Zone, describing it in the interests of warmongers in the United States and the region.
While there are various analyses of White House approaches and even the launching of a psychological war on Iran, there are many criticisms of American unilateralism and inadequate understanding of development on the part of Trump.
The president of the United States expressed contradictory responses to the incident in Baghdad. Although he officially threatened to annihilate Iran in a tweet, he almost simultaneously spoke in an interview with the Fox News network of the White House's reluctance to drag in military engagement with Iran, and emphasized that his government's goal was to compel Iran to negotiate through economic war. Analysts believe these totally different approaches can be due to inadequate advice by the president's advisor, or Trump is incapable of understanding the conditions of the region.
** White House's allies and contradictions
The NBC news network on resistance against Trump has written that his threats against Iran have been challenged by some foreign officials, especially in Europe. One of the most important statements was expressed by the British general in the global coalition against the ISIS. In response to John Bolton's statement that the United States was prepared to deal with attacks on the US interests in Iraq, General Chris Ghika said that forces close to Iran have been present in Iraq, and over the years coalition forces have accepted this. In response to White House officials, the general said that he saw no increase in threatening movements in Iraq and Syria.
On the other hand, German Foreign Minister Haiku Moss, in a meeting with his American counterpart Mike Pompeo, said his unilateral Washington strategy of increasing pressure on Iran was incorrect, and added, 'Always the maximum pressure has the risk of unwanted conflict.
The senior German official believes that if one looks at the other important regions in the world, it will be concluded that 'we should consider patience and other solutions'.
According to the analysis of the American media, the disagreement between the United States and Europe is clear and Washington is protesting the continuation of the Brusselsbased relationship with Tehran.
London's Chatham House thinktank analyst Sanam Vakil believes Europe is warning the United States about adopting a more cautious approach to Iran. One of the reasons for European countries is their geographic proximity to the Middle East.
The analyst insisted that Europeans ultimately believe that the Trump government has created a crisis that they had been able to prevent. The occurrence of such conditions was the result of the withdrawal of the United States from a nuclear deal with Iran, while engagement with Iran was in good shape.
** Washington's miscalculation and misconceptions about development
Many analysts consider the White House's approach to Iran as uncertain and ambiguous. According to experts, this situation is either due to a misunderstanding of developments or previous experience has led to previous miscalculation.
The Atlantic warned in a report on Washington's policy of increasing tension with Tehran, and Trump and his associates in the past week showed that they were not in the same direction. However, it should not implement the same policy (launching war) that was pursued in Iraq, because the two countries are not the same.
According to the report, threats against the US forces are serious in a clash with Iran, which has been acknowledged by Senators and US House of Representatives. But it's not yet clear what extraordinary action has taken by Iran based on which the United States has focused its military presence on the region in recent weeks.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the developments are due to the misunderstanding of the United States and Iran, and in fact, Iran prepares itself to confront the US attacks. The New York Times also states that on the other hand, the United States has also the same assessment as it has captured images of Iranian boats carrying missiles in the Persian Gulf.
But in any case, according to Atlantic, last week the antiIran rhetoric by the US was less than before, especially since the New York Times' report that 120,000 US troops were preparing to enter the area was denied by White House officials.
According to Van Jackson, senior defense officials in the administration of Barack Obama and author of a book on North Korean threat and Kim and Trump talk, the US president had entered a large gamble on North Korea, and because he did not pay any price for the game, now he considers himself a great gambler. He had no understanding of the North Korean crisis, and this lack of information would repeat this procedure and the mistakes would probably be catastrophic.
Source: Islamic Republic News Agency IRNA