Our staying out of Iran is what actually feeds the anti-Americanism in Iran. It is what fosters most of the anti-American conspiracy theories – the kind of theories that abound in countries that are affected greatly by American whims. It has led many Iranians – far more than most Americans realize — to say such things as ‘America is supporting this Ayatollah regime, America is protecting it even while it pretends to be against it’.

The same goes for when we intervene a little bit but then leaving the regime intact. Why do we leave this vicious enemy regime intact when we don’t have to? It’s assumed we must have some hidden interest, such as oil, in doing this.

The same goes for making a deal with the regime when we have it on the ropes, instead of getting rid of it. The Witkoff maneuver, so to speak. The deal is seen as America propping up the regime. (Which sometimes the deal in fact does.) For what purpose? Iranians can only assume it is some nefarious hidden purpose. The rumor mills runs wild on the possibilities.

* * *

Little can Iranians imagine the actual reason why we have done this for nearly half a century. The actual reason is too simple, and too immaterial: it is an ideological reason, one that we Americans have embedded deeply into our psychology.

The regnant ideology states that we must not change an enemy regime. Because that would supposedly be selfish, imperialist, counterproductive, destabilizing, etc etc etc.

That is why we don’t do it.

We have made it impossible, in our domestic political terms of debate, to suggest changing an enemy regime. From Bush II to Obama to Trump I to Vance et al, we have declared “regime change” a thing to be avoided at all costs. Each president, as candidate, demonized the opposite party for have done “regime change”. Then they came to power, and when they found they out that they had to do a regime change anyway, they would deny that they were doing it, would reach for other eccentric justifications for it, and would........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)