Imagine the world without communist North Korea and Islamic Republic of Iran

Imagine the world without nuclear communist North Korea and terrorist Islamic Republic of Iran and how these alternative reality events add legitimacy to the necessity for the Israel to end the dependence on U.S. military and financial assistance.

Imagine the world without nuclear communist North Korea and terrorist Islamic Republic of Iran. There are instead a prosperous democracy of unified Korea and secular Iran governed by the democratically elected leaders.

The North Korea and Islamic Republic of Iran are cases in point demonstrating the consequences of the disastrous decisions or indecisions of the leadership of the United State of America.

The history of the Korean peninsula conflict and the depiction of the alternative reality events which could have been resulted in United Democratic Korea.

After the Russian-Japanese war in 1905 the Japan colonized the Korean Peninsula. The Japan’s brutal colonial rule lasted close to four decades. When the Japan was defeated in 1945 the Korean Peninsula was divided by victorious powers, the USA and Soviet Union, using the 38th parallel as the border line. The North part of the Peninsula was under the rule of the Soviet Union and its proxies and the South was under the military authority of USA. It was a temporary arrangement. President Truman in 1947 stated he wants to end the American occupation on the territory under the military authority of US. In 1948, the United States suggested to United Nations (UN) to call for a new, unified and independent Korea. But the Soviet Union rejected the UN terms and the United Nations decided to hold the election in the South only. On May 10, 1948 the new assembly of representatives was elected in the South of the peninsula and in two months it ratified a new constitution.  On July 20 the assembly elected Syngman Rhee as the first President of the Republic of Korea. Mr. Rhee ideologically was attuned with ideas similar to American’s: free marker capitalism, independence from foreign control and strong federal government. He was an unyielding anti-communist. On the North of the peninsula occupied by the Soviet Union the Democratic Republic of Korea was established on September 9, 1948. A communist, Kim Il Sung became head of state.

On June 25, 1950 the North Korean People’s Army invaded Republic of Korea with 75,000 troops.  In several days the North Korean’s were able to take the South Korean capital of Seoul. The reaction of the United States to this aggression was to call the United Nations Security Council and “on June 27th the Security Council asked UN members to provide military assistance to help South Korea repel the invasion”. The US enter the military action on June 30, 1950. Douglas MacArthur, the US Army general and commander of the UN forces in Korea thought that the tide of the war can be changed by the sudden movement of the forces behind the Korean People’s Army. It did work and on September 15th the UN force had landed at Inchon and on September 29th.  the South Korea’s capital Seoul was in the hands of UN troops. The North Koreans were pushed back behind the 38th parallel and the American forces were moving toward the Yalu River which makes a border between North Korea and China.

The dynamics of the war had changed at the end of the 1950 when the Chinese enter the military action on behalf of the North Koreans and it stopped the UN forces advance.

By this time there was a fundamental difference in the approach to the Korean war by the President Truman and the commander of the UN forces in Korea, general Douglas MacArthur. President Truman and his advisers did not want a full-scale war and he was doing everything to avoid escalation of the hostilities with Chinese. Harry Truman and people counselling him were afraid that the increased confrontation with China can provoke the Soviets to invade Europe, cause deployment of nuclear arms.

On the other hand, the General MacArthur thought the war effort should be increased and “anything short of this wider war represented ‘appeasement’, and unacceptable knuckling under to the communists’. In March 1951 he wrote a letter to the House Republican leader, Joseph Martin, who shared general’s opinion on full-scale war with China, that stated “no substitute for victory against international communism”. He disagreed with the policy of President Truman:” War’s very object is victory, not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitution for victory”.

On April 11, 1951 the President Truman fired Douglas MacArthur for insubordination.

What if President Truman was in the agreement with the general Douglas MacArthur and the United Nation forces would continue the fight with the communists and were successful.  The world would have a unified democratic Korea and China would be governed by the democratically elected heads of state.

The history of the Pahlavi dynasty and the depiction of alternative reality events which could have been resulted in the Democratic secular Iran.

The Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, was born on October 26, 1919 in Tehran. His father, Reza Shah Pahlavi, was the founder of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925. Mohammad Reza was educated in Europe, Switzerland. During the Second World War Iran was occupied by Great Britain and Soviet Union. The Reza Shah was forced by occupying powers into exile and his son Mohammad Reza became a ruler of Iran on September 16, 1941.

The first challenge to his power the Shah of Iran encounter in the early 1950s. The Mohammad Mosaddegh, an Iranian nationalist and patriot, was able to pass a bill in the Iranian parliament on March 1951 calling for nationalization of the British petroleum interests in Iran. Considering the increasing influence and popularity of Mosaddegh the Shah of Iran was forced to appoint him as a Prime Minister. For two years there was a power struggle between the Shah of Iran and Mosaddegh which resulted in Mohammad Reza fleeing the country in August 1953.  The exile lasted only several days and the Mohammad Reza Pahlavi had returned back to Iran as a leader of the country.  This quick restoration of the monarchy happened because of the movement of the Mosaddegh opponents and covert actions of the United States and Unites Kingdom. The nationalization of the oil industry in Iran did not go the way Mohammad Mosaddegh envisioned.  In 1954 Iran finalized agreement to split revenues from oil production with the international consortium lead by British Petroleum. Using the revenues from oil production Shah of Iran initiated a national development program, called the White Revolution and also used the money from oil revenues to buy enormous quantity of sophisticated and latest military equipment and weaponry  from United States.

When in January of 1977 President Carter took office, he became heir to the relationship with Iran established by the previous American administrations. The Iran’s strategical position in the Persian Gulf played an important role in the relationship between the two countries as well as Iran’s oil. The President Nixon and specifically his foreign policy adviser, Henry Kissinger, employed a policy of  unconditional support for the Shah of Iran and thus ensure the American power in the Persian Gulf region.

During the Cold War era many American administrations used the doctrine of ‘realpolitik’ in relationships with other countries. This doctrine had articulated that United States must employ a realistic and commonsense foreign policy not based on the moralistic ideas. “A foreign policy crafted around morals and idealism, according to the doctrine, only agitated nationalism and communism in the third world and would lead to more violence and upheaval”.

Carter and the Democrats refused to accept the concept of realpolitik and stated that the United States officials responsible for the foreign policy should not have to choose between the morality and U.S. interests. “By reinstituting morality at home and abroad through the promotion of global human rights. Carter believed he could restore the standing of America’s institution, both in the eyes of the world and in the eyes of the American people”.

At the very beginning of his term, Carter emphasized the America’s absolute commitment to human rights.  Also, “Carter entered the Oval Office in January 1977 believing that the Cold War had neared its conclusion, and that the traditional fight against Soviet Union and communism had become outdated”

The Carter administration realized that to promote the global human rights agenda to foreign countries there need to be certain consequences to the governments violating the human rights. The Carter’s administration announced that countries violating human rights will be denied the financial and military aid from United States.

But when it is concerned the nations where U.S. had relationships involving mutual interests the advancement of the human rights was more problematic.  “ The U.S. , through the Shah, could contain communism and ensure access to Iran’s oil, and the Shah could maintain authority  and power in Iran” and “as much as the Shah was favorable to the interests of the U.S, , he was equally as detrimental towards the humanitarian situation in his own country”.

At the beginning of the Carter’s term as a President, the National Front, the liberal opposition organization to Shah’s rule in Iran, was removed from the political process by the action of the Iranian secret police, SAVAK. It was arresting the opposition members and sentence them without a trial. But the Shah did notice the Carter’s attitudes towards the human rights violations and his promotion of global human rights movement.  Shah realized that the special relationship between United States and Iran can be affected negatively because of the Iran’s violation of human rights. In the spring of 1977 Shah started relaxing the pressure on the political opposition and he allowed the Red Cross to have access to Iranian prisons and courts. “The relaxation of repression due to Carter’s human rights policy allowed the liberal opposition to grow and flourish. The common goal of these groups was to force the Shah to put an end to his despotic practices and uphold Iran’s 1906 constitution”.

During the first year of Carter’s presidency in 1977, because of the emphasis of the American government on the importance of the policy of human rights, there was an opportunity to severe the ties with the Shah and to increase support for the liberal opposition. This could have led to a parliamentary democracy government in Iran.

However, “the Carter administration began to take notice of the changes in Shah’s policy towards the opposition.  As a confidential memo stated in the summer of 1977, Carter administration was pleased by the Shah’s ‘recent significantly more open approach to human rights matters. Because of this, Carter’s relationship with Shahn improved by the fall of 1977.  Of course, Shah’s reforms were largely for show, as he desperately tried to avoid falling out of Washington’s favor”. The momentum to encourage the liberal forces in Iran to strengthen their position and gain power was lost by the Carter’s administration.

The State of Israel has bilateral relationship with U.S. The Americans has a loyal partner in the unstable area of the globe and many U.S. official tell that Israel is a friend of America. However, the examples of the decisions or indecisions of the American administrations stated above (the Korean peninsula situation and Iran) demonstrate the danger to the State of Israel from the dependence on American aid and on its leaders’.  As the national security advisor to the President Nixon Henry Kissinger noted’ It is dangerous to be an enemy of U.S., but to be a friend is fatal’. The attempt of the American government to interfere into Israeli election goes back to the presidency of Bill Clinton. The open antagonism towards Israel, to its government and Jewish people was evident during the presidency of Barak Hussein Obama.  The present presidency of Joe Biden, with the more then half of his White House staff from Obama’s administration, shows arrogance, disregard to the existential needs of the State of Israel and disrespect on steroids: they send orders to the government of Israel which undermine the existence of the Jewish state.

There are many factors which elevate the need for Israel to end the dependence on United States to a national priority of the highest level. The disgusting behaviors of the leaders of ruling Democratic Party after the horrible October 07 attack don’t leave any doubt that Henry Kissinger was right.

About the Author
I am a Canadian who is acutely aware of the serious situation the State of Israel is experiences at the present and expresses his concern by writing articles on the current issues.