Brian Berletic is a US-based geopolitical researcher and writer at The New Atlas, and is a former Marine.
Much of our conversation is based on a 2009 paper by The Brookings Institution, which outlines various strategies the US could employ towards Iran. Interestingly, many of these strategies have been implemented over the years.
To be clear, the Brookings Institution is a big player in shaping US foreign policy and is funded by both the US government and various private corporations.
All roads lead to Iran
The US is actively looking for a war with Iran as part of its broader geopolitical agenda.
Iran, on the other hand, has been adept at avoiding such provocations. The 2009 paper discusses, in detail, the use of covert regime change efforts and military aggression against Iran. It even admits that Iran poses no genuine national security threat to the US.
The idea is to provoke Iran into a war.
If that doesn’t work, the US will proceed with military action anyway.
Israel is a US proxy, in this instance.
The paper also considers the possibility that Iran might show restraint even if attacked, to appear as the victim on the global stage.
American elections don’t matter
There’s a continuity in US foreign policy across different administrations, from Obama to Trump and Biden. The real policy makers aren’t the elected representatives but rather unelected corporate-funded think tanks.
In other words, the American president is irrelevant.
These think tanks produce policy papers that eventually become bills, which are then sold to the public through corporate media.
Currently, there’s a US military build-up in the Middle East.
The US is running out of time and acting desperately, not just against Iran but also against Russia and China. Washington’s willingness to use terrorist groups to advance foreign policy objectives is pretty obvious, especially considering US actions in Syria.
Here’s my conversation with Brian Berletic.