By Farid A. Khavari, Ph.D.
Ratification of the nuclear deal with Iran does not eliminate the threat of war, but only postpones it while the Shia-Mullahs grow stronger.
Most people think there are only two options: accept the nuclear deal, or go to war with Iran. The nuclear deal will elevate the Shia-Mullah regime to the dominant power in the region with devastating results for the U.S. and its allies. War with Iran would destroy the global economy and bring death and suffering to millions.
However, there is a Third Option: peaceful regime change by the Iranian people themselves, with no outside military action. Conditions are ripe, and this kind of regime change can be accomplished rapidly and effectively. A friendly regime in Iran would eliminate the nuclear threat, end Iran’s support for international terrorism, stabilize the Middle East, secures energy supplies for the world, and more, as shown in the chart below.
CONSEQUENCES OF THREE OPTIONS FOR DEALING WITH IRAN
| REGIME CHANGE BY THE IRANIAN PEOPLE, NO WAR | IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL, POTENTIAL FOR WAR | WAR WITH IRAN |
| Ends Iranian support for terrorism, replaced with a civilized, friendly regime consisting of experts in different fields. | Makes the Shia-Mullah regime the top power, expands terrorism, leading eventually to war. | Immediate disruption of oil and gas supplies and the global economy. |
| Establishes balance between Shias and Sunnis in the region, leading to weakening and eventual dismantling of ISIS/ISIL. | Rise of terrorism and radical Islam worldwide, and control of Islam by the Shia Mullahs. | Massive casualties on all fronts, millions dead and disabled. |
| Recognition of Israel by the largest country in the Middle East, with friendly relations and trade. | Rising threat of annihilation of Israel and occupation of Saudi Arabia. | Tens of millions of refugees. |
| Ends Iran’s drive to dominate the region and the threat to Saudi Arabia, Israel and Gulf states; blocks the spread of radical Islam to Europe and the U.S. | Dominance of radical Shia Islam, and the end of kings and sheikhs in the Middle East. | Collapse of the world economy. |
| Abolishment of torture and capital punishment; political and social freedom based on modern civil law, not Sharia Law. | Rise of Sharia Law and execution of political opponents. | Potential end of the civilized world as we know it. |
| Neutralizes Russian influence in the region. | Gives Russia access to the Middle East and North Africa. | |
| Protects the U.S. Dollar’s reserve currency status; continuing prosperity for the U.S. | Weakens the U.S. Dollar as world reserve currency, leading to shrinking prosperity in the U.S. | |
| Opens the huge Iran market for U.S. businesses, civilian and military; hundreds of billions of dollars in new trade agreements. | Loss of the huge Iran market to Russia and China. | |
| Ends the nuclear threat and defuses the nuclear arms race. | Rise of nuclear arms race in the Middle East. | |
| Secure, stable energy market for the world, especially for the U.S. and western allies. | Insecure energy market worldwide. | |
| Peace and prosperity for the Middle East, North Africa and the world. | Rising social costs of all kinds for the world economy and growing poverty worldwide. | |
| The lowest cost option of all, with the greatest benefits to the U.S., Iran, and the region. Regime change would cost less than $20 million. Part of the $150 billion in frozen assets will be used to implement an economic plan which creates millions of jobs.This money is recovered from the booming economy. Most of the money is distributed to the people of Iran, boosting U.S. and European economies as well. | Costs of this option are very high. Much of $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets ends up in Russia and China. At least $50 billion to protect and police the region, $10 billion or more per year related to refugees; $10 – $50 billion in foreign aid to Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, and other friendly nations in the region; $2 – $5 billion over 10 years for monitoring nuclear activities in Iran. | Would cost millions of lives and $10 Trillion or more, while destroying the global economy. |
Dr. Farid Khavari is a noted independent economist and author of 10 books, including the classic Environomics (1993) and Oil and Islam: The Ticking Bomb (1990) which predicted that Iran, not Saddam Hussein, would become the biggest threat in the Middle East. He is the creator of Zero Cost Economics and was on the ballot in 2010 and 2014 for Florida Governor. More information is at www.zerocosteconomy.com Dr. Khavari can be contacted by email at fk@zerocosteconomy.com
Yes, peaceful regime change WOULD end this mess. However, Dr. Kharvi fails to mention HOW that could come about.
The Mullah’s are not going to allow free and fair elections. Period.
Can’t speak for Khavari, but that would be the subject of another post. We’ve seen movements lead to regime change before. Egypt is a prime example. Some work, some don’t. What is common among them is, it comes from the bottom up. Grassroots. The Obama administration let an opportunity to support the ‘green’ movement in Iran pass. And we are where we are today. With Obama legitimizing nuclear proliferation in Iran. He’s on the wrong side of peace in the Middle East. But those ‘green’ movement people are still there. Probably going to take a regime change here before they would trust the United States again.
Dear Ross Iran and Iranian are not Arab , if they are able to change it they will change it for good , 1979 Jimy was helping the Mulla and 2015 Obama. Iranian never forget Jimy and will not forget Obama . so help Dr Khavari and let him to work it out .
Please let Iranian to find the way for that ,I am sure Pht Khavari should know how to do it .If this will happen need a lot of work which can not be public so we should support the 3rd Idea and let Mr Khavari and Iranian find the way to do it .
I never said I didn’t support him. I merely said that peaceful regime change won’t happen by itself in Iran.
Dear King ,you should please read carefully what Dr Khavari put it up there , I read it few times .I think he knows what he is talking about .if we agree with him we should support him .
I never said I didn’t support him. I merely said that peaceful regime change won’t happen by itself in Iran.
I am trying to comment here, but this site keeps telling me I already posted….
You did. Three times. And it looks like spam. You are “commenting” to the article about Iran. If you want to send a comment to me, the admin, use the form in the About page.