By: Ehud Elam, Senior Fellow

The Iranian regime is at a low point. This evil empire of the Middle East is in trouble due to several reasons, both political and economic.

Those who seek to topple the Iranian regime should seize the opportunity to tighten the net around Iran. It is in the interest of the United States and its allies, including those in the Middle East such as Israel and the Arab states. Getting rid of the Iranian regime will serve the Iranian people, as well. The anti-Iranian coalition has to initiate and increase steps against the Iranian regime.

In recent weeks there has been unrest in both Lebanon and Iraq.

Some of the protesters are supposed to be on Iran’s side since they are Shiites. (Iran is mostly Shiite, unlike most of the Arab states.) The protesters demand improvements to their quality of life by adding jobs and fixing public services. They also oppose Iran’s intervention in their country. They go against their own governments, which in both Lebanon and Iraq are heavily influenced by Iran and its allies. The demonstrations, therefore, are another part of the struggle against Iran. The anti-Iranian coalition needs to be cautious here in order not to allow Iran and its partners to argue that the unrest is planned by other states.

Nevertheless, those who just want a better life and wish to reduce Iran’s grip on their country should receive aid.

There were protests in Iran itself in recent years. The Iranian regime had managed to survive the recent wave of protests that occurred in November. More than 300 Iranian civilians were killed by the Iranian regime during the crackdown.

It shows how desperate the Iranian regime has become. The next wave of demonstrations against it might be stronger than the last one. The anti-Iranian coalition has to support the protesters, yet be careful not to give an excuse to the Iranian regime to present demonstrations against it as a Western plot.

The Iranian regime has not done enough to provide basic needs to its people. The 1979 revolution promised a lot for the Iranian people but failed to deliver. In spite of Iran’s potential and its vast oil fields, many of the people there are struggling to make ends meet. This is because the regime is corrupt and ineffective.

Furthermore, the regime prefers to pour its money into adventures in the Middle East.

Iran is involved in several wars in the region, supporting its allies in countries such as Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon. The cost to Iran has been more than $20 billion in Syria alone. Iran sees that as necessary for its national security but so far this approach certainly has not paid off for the Iranian people.

This policy is executed at the expense of raising the living standards of the Iranian people. Iran’s strategy also brought heavy sanctions against it that crippled its economy and caused more suffering to its people. It is causing enormous resentment against the Iranian regime. Iran is digging its own grave.

The Iranian regime has high ambitions: to be the superpower of the Middle East.

Therefore, Iran gives its protégés not just money but also weapons and advisers. Sometimes, Iran even sends its own troops to fight in places like Syria. All that effort demonstrates how eager Iran is to expand — regardless of the cost for many in the region, including many Iranians. The anti-Iranian coalition has to be strong and united so it can block and contain Iran. It will weaken Iran and buy time until the regime there collapses.

Iran is striving to build nuclear weapons. This project has been going on for several decades now and it is very expensive, another example for Iran’s willingness to ignore the needs of its people in favor of other goals.

Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons in order to have enough military strength to do whatever it wants. Iran has breached the 2015 nuclear agreement that is supposed to limit its nuclear capabilities. If the country actually tries to produce the bomb, it must be stopped by the anti-Iranian coalition. All the options have to be on the table, including the military one.

The Iranian regime is doomed to fail; it is only a matter of time considering the country’s foreign and domestic policy. The huge cost of corruption, poor management of domestic affairs and eagerness to take over the Middle East will eventually bring it down. Meanwhile, the economic pressure on Iran is growing. The anti-Iranian coalition must continue.

This article was originally published as an Op-Ed in The Western Journal on 20 December 2019.

We are living through a period of increasing threat to our security. This comes from dangerously well-equipped rogue states, from international terrorism, and from random hi-tech dissidents. Each threat requires a different type of response. Yet public opinion in Britain is apparently not convinced of the need to spend more on defence and security, which is the foremost duty of the state.

Britain’s defence faces additional challenge at this moment. At home, there is the possibility of an extreme Left-wing government whose leaders have expressed support for the Queen’s enemies and for regimes most hostile to western democratic values. Abroad, the EU is now obsessed with two essentially French ideas of “strategic autonomy” and a European Defence Union. These will lead to separation from transatlantic allies and from non-EU European states, including Britain and Turkey.

Over the years, national vetoes on EU policy have been removed in more and more policy areas and EU competences have been expanded at the expense of our national governments. It is now proposed that previously sacrosanct areas of foreign and defence policy will be handled by ‘Qualified Majority Voting’ – national governments would then no longer have ultimate responsibility for the deployment, equipment and lives of their armed forces.

Josep Borrell, a member of the Spanish Socialist Workers Party, has just been anointed as the new EU Foreign and Defence chief, the so-called High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. He will control over 139 EU ’embassies’ with nearly 7,000 staff costing some £500 million. He has a military staff, scanning the globe for opportunities to run up the EU flag on military operations. So far it has notched up some 30 operational “Common Security and Defence Policy missions”. Most were self-generated. Few stand up to scrutiny. There was no requirement for the EU as such to be involved in any of them.

France’s leadership has always seen Britain as a ‘Trojan horse’ for American influence on European security. They have been trying to remove this influence for the past 60 years. France left the military part of NATO in 1966 while keeping her seat at the NATO top table. She returned in 2009 only to be the driving force in creating separate EU defence structures that imitate NATO. The highest European strategic priority should be to ensure the continued commitment of the US to the security of Britain and continental Europe, as the ultimate guarantor of peace. NATO, an inter-governmental organisation, is designed to achieve

this. The EU will never have the necessary strategic credibility to deter our potential adversaries.

Military capabilities take time to develop but are quickly lost. Aware how drastically our armed forces have been cut over the past 30 years, many of us have persistently called for a significant increase in real defence spending in the UK and for upgrading NATO. At the same time we have opposed EU defence policy, not through any shallow motive, but because we see it for what it is – a political project.

The continental states, but also Britain, all need to spend more on national defence capabilities, revitalising NATO and stepping up to form coalitions of the willing rather than meekly going along with the creation of alternative EU structures, which sap material and political resources and send the wrong signals to our enemies.

Those pushing European integration see the defence realm as key to their political objectives. Far from strengthening the alliance of the democracies at this time of unprecedented challenge, the ‘EU army’ idea will further dilute what limited capabilities exist, blur responsibility, and send the wrong signals to our adversaries. The EU also aims to create a defence industrial development programme with common procurement rules that would effectively keep the Americans out of the EU defence market. All this will lead to division and a widening of transatlantic difference. In time of crisis, the democracies are best served by sitting around the same table to decide on a response. NATO is designed for precisely that. In spite of the fact that 22 EU countries are also NATO members, the EU wants to meet separately, keeping the Americans out. Moscow and Teheran can only be delighted.

Our incoming Prime Minister will face many immediate and enormous challenges. High among these will be our national defence and security. Clearly someone with Jeremy Corbyn’s beliefs cannot be allowed anywhere near our armed forces, our nuclear deterrent, our defence industries or our intelligence services. Boris Johnson is well aware that improved defence capabilities are not only essential for our national security, but central to our ambitions to enhance our global presence post-Brexit and to play a leading role in the development of our hi-tech industries. In support, much will need to be done to develop positive public understanding.

Rather than us being the needy one, Britain must once more become the indispensable ally that others need.