US Analyst: Iran’s Strategic Depth Redefines Regional Geopolitics, Beyond Venezuela Comparison
Washington D.C. / Doha – A prominent U.S. political science expert, Dr. Jamal Qassem of Grand Valley State University, has challenged simplistic comparisons of Iran to Venezuela, asserting on Al Jazeera that Iran’s unique strategic position and capabilities warrant a distinct approach in U.S. foreign policy. His analysis delves into the complexities of U.S.-Iran relations, particularly under the fluctuating policies of the former U.S. administration.
Navigating Trump’s Unpredictable Stance
Dr. Qassem highlighted the inherent unpredictability in former President Trump’s approach to Iran. Trump’s rhetoric often oscillated between overt threats of regime change and targeting Iran’s political leadership, and declarations of willingness to pursue a new nuclear agreement. This ambiguity, Qassem notes, presented a double-edged sword: while it might offer the U.S. president tactical political and military initiative, it also carried the significant risk of miscalculation by adversaries, potentially drawing the U.S. into an unintended conflict.
Iran: A Geopolitical Power, Not Another Venezuela
A central tenet of Dr. Qassem’s argument is that Iran fundamentally differs from Venezuela, a distinction he believes is crucial for policymakers to grasp. He suggested that perceived success in Venezuela, which saw limited international deterrence from powers like China and Russia, might have emboldened some U.S. decision-makers regarding Iran. However, Qassem strongly cautions against such an analogy.
He points out that the political demands made of Iran—including a complete halt to its nuclear program, disengagement from regional allies, and abandonment of its missile capabilities—are substantial. Yet, Iran possesses a deep-rooted combat ideology, extensive military capabilities, and a long history of military experience. The nation has demonstrated remarkable resilience and steadfastness despite enduring decades of arduous economic blockade since the late 1970s, dating back to the inception of the Islamic Republic.
Furthermore, Qassem underscores Iran’s capacity to significantly impact global oil trade via the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately 20% of the world’s seaborne oil passes. Any disruption in this vital waterway could have far-reaching implications for the global economy. Unlike the Venezuelan government, which largely accommodated U.S. demands to avoid direct military confrontation, Iran’s deeply ingrained political history and national sentiment suggest a different response, especially if its supreme political leadership were to be targeted.
Regional and International Dynamics at Play
The regional environment surrounding Iran also signals a strong preference for avoiding conflict. Dr. Qassem highlights that Gulf countries have officially and unequivocally rejected the use of their territories for any U.S. military action against Iran.
Turkey, too, has been actively engaged in mediation efforts to de-escalate tensions between the U.S. and Iran, seeking to facilitate the continuation of nuclear talks. The success of such mediation, Qassem suggests, hinges on both Iran’s flexibility and a clearer articulation of President Trump’s genuine objectives behind military escalations.
On the international stage, Russia and China appear more resistant to U.S. military intervention in Iran compared to their stance on Venezuela. This increased opposition, Qassem attributes, is largely due to the robust economic and military ties that link Iran with these two significant global powers.
Unseen Paths and Future Prospects
Dr. Qassem acknowledges the possibility of “unseen dynamics and undisclosed matters” shaping the U.S.-Israel approach toward Iran. Nevertheless, he posits that recent diplomatic engagements and back-and-forth movements could potentially contribute to de-escalating tensions between Iran and the United States, potentially leading to an agreement on general principles related to Iran’s nuclear program and missile capabilities.
Such an outcome, he speculates, might allow the U.S. President to present military pressure and the threat of force as effective strategies for compelling adversaries to concede to political demands. In conclusion, Dr. Qassem observes that the U.S.-Iranian dynamic has entered a critical phase, with the strings of current events seemingly held by the U.S. administration, while the ultimate outcome remains a matter of destiny.
