Bhopinder Singh | Trump’s New Iran Threats Expose America’s Lack Of History & Memory

As US President Donald Trump issued his latest ultimatum to Tehran and geared up for what could be the most massive US air, naval and military campaign in years, the truism that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it looms large. Emboldened by his recent successful act of kidnapping the Venezuelan President, the natural bully in Mr Trump shifts his attention to a nation that prides itself on civilisational antiquity that traces back to the Achaemenid Empire (circa 550 BCE).

President Trump literally danced as he quipped: “By the way, there’s another beautiful armada floating beautifully towards Iran right now”, and added sarcastically: “Bigger than Venezuela”.

The US-Iran relationship typifies the different timelines of the “start” of the bilateral narrative. For most Americans, the Iranian storyline started with the Iranian revolution of 1979, with the fall of the Shah, the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini and the 444-day hostage drama of the US embassy in Tehran. Of course, no context is afforded on the popular mood in Iran that was prevailing then, which viewed the US-friendly regime of the Shah as a “puppet” of foreign imperialism. As the American administration muses about the monarchical times as sort of a Shangri-La, the history of its dreaded Savak (Shah’s secret police), political repression/censorship, and the virtual surrender of Iran’s foreign, economic and domestic policy to US interests, are never discussed. The Shah’s excesses and tone-deaf extravagances in the face of gross economic inequities like the 1971 Persepolis celebrations remain unimagined in the Western discourse.

The proverbial “West” always feigns ignorance as to why the Third World (most of whom are former colonies) like the Middle Eastern countries, or even Southern American nations like Venezuela despise the United States. Regrettably, the full context of the dark history, and specifically of the exploitative and transactional nature of American policies, is forever missing in the American consciousness. In Venezuela, for example, there are good reasons for Americans to be derided as “gringos” or even the politically charged insult, “Pitiyanqee” (little Yankee). Similarly, in Iran, the most popular pejorative term for the US is “Great Satan”, as is the slogan “Death to America”. These terms are born of unrecognised frustrations against the United States. But as the Americans have the so-called “monopoly on truth”, the villainisation of countries like Venezuela or Iran continues unabated.

For most Iranians the devious ways of the Americans hark back to the undoing of the nationalist Iranian PM Mohammad Mossadeq in a 1953 coup orchestrated by the US Central Intelligence Agency and the British spy agency MI6 (Operation Ajax). Mossadeq is still revered as the symbol of Iranian sovereignty, democracy and resistance to foreign interference. Mossadeq had famously nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) to reclaim natural resources and sovereign pride -- but this assertion of economic independence had left the “West” fuming, and in order to control the critical oil supplies, the popular patriot was ousted. It has become the touchstone for the anti-imperialist sentiment, which haunts the Americans even till now. Except in America, not many people appear to read history. This is not to say that the current Iranian regime or the Nicolas Maduro regime in Venezuela were the modicums of ideal governance, but that does not legitimise President Trump’s unwarranted interference or propped-up regimes that do the bidding of Washington DC. History is instructive that the United States (and especially Mr Trump) may have a very limited understanding of the past, but in the ancient and impoverished alleys of Tehran or Caracas, an alternative truth prevails, unbeknownst to most of the world outside.

It was unequivocally about the oil in 1953 in Iran, and it was also about the oil in 2026 in Venezuela. The latest militaristic buildup against Iran, which could regress into violent conflict yet again, is also about oil, singularly. Many who disapprove of the ayatollahs’ regime in Iran or the Maduro regime in Caracas cannot simultaneously believe that the US interference in their domestic affairs is about anything but controlling the vital energy resources for the sole betterment of the Americans. It is not about ushering in any democratic traditions, liberalism, or even free speech, as the US under Mr Trump has seen its own backsliding on all these fronts, like never before. US foreign policy, with its threatening tenor, is always about the misplaced notions of MAGA, or Make America Great Again!

Many Iranians in the opposition ranks may view Mr Trump’s threats as a necessary pressure to weaken the regime, but as the EuroNews Persian survey confirms, the vast majority of Iranians still view Mr Trump as self-centred, unpredictable and willing to hurt the ordinary Iranian, as long as it benefits Mr Trump personally. Some recent instances of US-led militaristic interventions in countries like Iraq, Yemen, Libya or even

Afghanistan prove that it has always failed to win local support. The reason for the subliminal suspicions of the Americans has always been owing to the questionable US intent in its foreign policies, as always perceived in the eyes of the interfered country. The Persian proverb “Az tajrobeh ebrat begir”, which literally translates as “learn from experience”, is routinely ignored on Capitol Hill, as half-truths and fear-mongering about things like Iran nuclear deal are bandied, when the reality is that it was unilaterally torn up by Mr Trump himself. Historical facts and memory have never been the strong point of American diplomacy, and Iran just proves it. The USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group in the Persian Gulf is signalling President Donald Trump’s unlearnt incorrigibility and ignorance.

The writer is a retired lieutenant-general and a former lieutenant-governor of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Puducherry