Huawei and 5G story isn't a theater, it's a real war. and just like Iran in which pro-west thoughts lost their credit, the same thing is
happening in China, already happened in Russia. and it's not about a fool named Trump (though he was god's biggest gift to Iran), even Francis Fukuyama the grand master of Globalism
defended the war against China and Huawei.
Chinese are realizing the Americans' definition of Globalism.
Nicely said. Now, Iran should make sure not to subscribe to any of the competing models of globalism, as globalism by its very definition means the end of nations, and also the end of established religious traditions, which globalists of any color intend to replace with a unified and ethnically mixed one-world "village-nation" as well as with Noahism, the planned single religion for all humans, respectively.
As for the above reply to your post, some here are trying to suggest that the western bloc's relationship with Russia and China suffered no change whatsoever over the past two decades. They seem to remain blind to obvious evolutions on the global stage, away from unipolarism and towards multipolarism. They appear ignorant of the obvious, multiplying signs of progressive decline of the US empire (which may take another century to fully come to fruition but what matters is to recognize the deep underlying tendency and to proceed accordingly), as well as of the mounting conflicts between the US regime and new emerging powers, which are not going to abate one bit but with time will only increase in intesity and extension.
Acting as if nothing has occurred and failing to adapt and to finetune one's policy to this rapidly evolving global redistribution and rebalancing of power between west and east, would amount to sheer folly. Note that this does not necessarily imply that there will be a major war, nor that Moscow and Beijing are going to be dream allies for Iran. Nonetheless, pretending that all these observable changes on the international scene are not going to be of any consequence for Iran is beyond naive.
Also note they are misrepresenting the alternative options at Iran's disposal, as well as the respective positions of the various political factions within the Iranian governing system: the choice isn't between "trusting the west" on the one hand vs "watching the east crush the west" on the other, but between relying primarily on foreigners (whether western or eastern) vs relying primarily on oneself. While the same users might eagerly dismiss the former formula as a "marxist (sic) delusion", it is precisely this self-reliant mindset that has kept Iran on her feet since 1979 and allowed her expand her power to levels her foes could never gave imagined.
Any incompressible remaining requirements in terms of imports / exports will be satisfied through grey and black market channels which no amount of American sanctioning will manage to eradicate. This too will be greatly facilitated by the rising tensions between the US regime and its Eurasian "partners", if alone for the fact that said partners will seek to prevent Iran's downfall as a means of payback and as a security guarantee against destructive US designs aimed at them.
Users in question often bring up the purportedly negative, sanctions-induced impact of not just reduced foreign trade in general but of oil exports in partiucular, obfuscating the fact that oil sanctions will accelerate Iran's transition towards a fully fledged non-oil economy, which in turn will making Iran more resilient and unsusceptible to US sanctions and bullying. They fail to evoke the fact that to this day Iran has not even made use of the economic ace up its sleeve, namely the introduction of a comprehensive system of tax collection to offset the diminution of oil revenues.
They throw invectives like "corrupt" at Iran, covering up the fact that the very essence and foundation of western and in particular US capitalism is corruption, deceit, integral immorality and brazen indifference to natural and religious law, in quantities unmatched anywhere accross the world and anytime in history.
They claim that in order to ensure her economic survival, Iran will have no choice other than to bow to US conditions, which happen to amount to capitulation complete with the dismantling of Iran's vital deterrence assets (i. e. its network of regional allies and its ballistic missile arsenal), or to "go nuclear". I am surprised no one got struck by the lack of logical soundness on both ends of this equation:
- Indeed, if Iran struck a comprehensive deal with the west by disarming, it would not result in her "survival" at all but on the contrary, this would lead to Iran's destruction exactly like Libya was destroyed before, either through direct military aggression or through the incitement of a civil war via large scale armed rebellion (including all sorts of separatist elements) against the central state.
- Acquiring nuclear weapons will not reduce the US regime's sanctions nor will it have any direct impact on the economy. Such a move might be useful on other fronts, but will not improve Iran's access to international markets, access which the user in question had been portraying as an indispensable condition for economic survival.
So clearly, this proposition by the user conflicts with his other statements.
In conclusion, let those who echo US and Isra"el"i regime narratives talk as much as they want... They've been doing the same for four decades, but not only is Islamic Iran standing strong despite the unimaginable challenges she is faced with, not only is Iran driving her enemies mad, given their utter incapacity and impotence at reaching their goals (goals which are nothing short of Iran's complete destruction by the way, contrary to what has been suggested by some), huge differential in conventional power to the benefit of Iran's enemies notwithstanding, but moreover the challenge posed by forces of righteousness to global oppression will, by the grace of God, go on indefinitely until the collapse of said oppressors.