The futurology of the Middle East

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

AmirAshkan Pishroo
by AmirAshkan Pishroo
28-Sep-2008
 

There is no need to spell out that Islamist terrorism is not, and never was, an existential threat to Western civilization as a whole. But this should not lead to a feeling of great relief, since it will have the potential to cause millions of deaths and unimaginable damage. Islamist terrorism is a security threat that will span a generation. But it will not last longer than two generations.

As for the oil, there will be as much oil as anyone might want. Large parts of Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia have not even been explored by the latest technological breakthroughs such as multilateral drilling and 3-D seismic drilling. However, oil prices will remain above the $100 mark per barrel for many years to come. While there is no objective reason for the current high level of prices, there is also no sign of any dramatic fall in prices.

Iran’s political position has got stronger. If the US quits Iraq prematurely, Persian hegemony in the Persian Gulf could become a reality, even without nukes. Iran will press ahead with its nuclear program until it masters the fuel cycle, and then will seek serious negotiations with the permanent five members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany.

The US policy towards Iran has been sanctions and more sanctions. Further sanctions are very unlikely to deflect Tehran from its nuclear ambitions. Iran’s pragmatist/reformist opposition is highly likely to triumph in the next presidential elections. This will lead to an opportunity for Mr. Bush’s successor, namely, Mr.Obama, to adopt a new policy of diplomatic engagement with Iran, offering a grand bargain to Tehran.

The reality about democratization of the Middle East that constituted the centerpiece of the Bush Doctrine, or what Mr. Bush has labeled the “freedom agenda,” is that it has been all but abandoned. An increasing number of the neo-conservatives who have given up on Mr. Bush believe that the “freedom agenda” was killed off not by the tough realities of the Middle East, and not by any strategical flaws, and not by its enemies’ counterattacks, but rather by its author’s loss of nerve in seeing it through, comprising the core principle in order to meet the diplomatic demands of the moment. Mr. Bush will hand on the Iraq, Iran, and Israeli-Palestinian problems to Mr. Obama in substantial disarray.

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by AmirAshkan PishrooCommentsDate
The assassination of an author
2
Oct 16, 2008
Americans: A nation of givers
14
Oct 10, 2008
John McCain & the making of a financial crisis
3
Oct 07, 2008
more from AmirAshkan Pishroo
 
Jaleho

Why dear Pishroo?

by Jaleho on Mon Sep 29, 2008 05:52 AM PDT

You say: "There is a difference between being original and being eclectic. The
latter, which I fall into its box, is just a result of getting easily
bored and looking around for something new, looking for new heroes
while remaining loyal, within reason, to old ones. This is how one ends
up a syncretist."

 

I say, why being so humble? I think you can proclaim yourself as being both very original AND eclectic. They are not mutually exclusive at all, you know. Besides, even if they were, a sycretist person like yourself should not have any difficulty being both.


  •  
AmirAshkan Pishroo

Dear Jaleho

by AmirAshkan Pishroo on Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:21 PM PDT

Dear Jaleho,

No trick or crap at all for a syncretist hack like me.

There is a difference between being original and being eclectic. The latter, which I fall into its box, is just a result of getting easily bored and looking around for something new, looking for new heroes while remaining loyal, within reason, to old ones. This is how one ends up a syncretist.

I think that there are many ways tp talk about what is going on, and that none of them gets closer to the way things are in themselves than any other.

Thanks for your impressive comment.


  •  
Jaleho

What a deterministic load of

by Jaleho on Sun Sep 28, 2008 07:07 PM PDT

crap!

Let's first look at how the author interprets events of the past and then see how scientific his "futurology" is. He says:

"The reality about democratization of the Middle East that constituted the centerpiece of the Bush Doctrine, or what Mr. Bush has labeled the “freedom agenda,” is that it has been all but abandoned. "

First, the centerpiece of Bush Doctrine wan not democratization of ME, it was rather giving HIM the authority for preemptive and unilateral war.The "democratization" of ME part was the neo-con's WET DREAM on the side!

Then he continues: "An increasing number of the neo-conservatives who have given up on Mr. Bush believe that the “freedom agenda” was killed off not by the tough realities of the Middle East, and not by any strategical flaws, and not by its enemies’ counterattacks, but rather by its author’s loss of nerve in seeing it through,"

Wrong again! It was PRECISELY the realities of the ME that killed Bush's "freedom agenda". The neo-cons dreamed that by encouraging free election and their extra money and political backing of their own lackeys, they would get the result they wanted. But, the elections in Lebanon, Iraq, and Palestine instead reflected the will of people. That's when all of a sudden everyone remembered ....."Hitler was elected democratically too, so why did we even cared for democracy??! All IDIOTS repeated that propaganda sentence ad nauseam. The idea of "freedom agenda" was sacked.
Democratically elected Hamas should be sanctioned and squeezed to death because Palestinians just don't understand what democracy means:  it mean sending OUR guy to your government, not yours.

And look at Mr. Pishroo's prediction of future now:

1.There will be as much oil as anyone wants. That is, Pishroo has his very own "anti-peak oil theory" but his prediction for price is what peak oil theorist predicted, above $100 p/b but they did so when oil was below $25. That is, the Peak Oil theorist, at least had some research to back up their theory AND had a very strong proof strengthening their idea. Mr. Pishroo seems to have the opposite conjecture but the same price target singularly based on his "bokhar-e-mede"

2. He also predicts that the next president in Iran will be a reformist. He is also certain that the next US president will be Obama.

3. He can even predict the exact time for future events like: "Islamist terrorism is a security threat that will span a generation. But it will not last longer than two generations."

It seems to me that Mr. Pishroo's deterministic predictions are rather than any scientifically based "futurology" is something like Nancy Reagan's "astrology" stemming from his deep seated arrogance.


  •