The Grand Chessboard 2.0? - Central Asia, Iran, Israel, and the Shah

There's so much that could be said right now about events in the Middle East and the conflict between Israel and Iran and the potential for a wider war including the United States and others.

For my part I think about scenarios in which the war could go sideways or the aftermath of a regime collapse.

If Khamenei is assassinated, would the regime unify around a successor? I wonder if he's made provisions for such? Otherwise in-fighting could lead to civil war or the collapse of the regime.

Though no official declaration has been made, there's now open talk of re-installing the Shah - the son of the Mohammad Reza Pahlavi who was ousted in 1979. Presumably this would be floated as a caretaker role, a step on a pathway to constitutional monarchy or something along those lines. How the Iranian public might respond to this is an open question. Pahlavi in his speeches has rewritten Iranian history at least in part. Yes, there were more freedoms (especially for women) but it was also an authoritarian state and it was this latter fact and the perception that the country was a Western puppet, and that Islam was being subverted, that led to popular support for the revolution. It's hard to imagine that things would go down this path - a literal reversal of events from almost fifty years ago and a strange sequel to the American-backed coup in 1953.

The reintroduction of the Shah could lead to civil war. This would also likely lead to outside powers such as China offering support to the Balochi insurgency in the south-east. Further, should the Kurds begin to fight (say in the context of a civil war) in order to carve out an autonomous region, such a move could motivate Ankara to military action. These are all scenarios in which a wider war could emerge. Iran could become the new Syria or Libya of the 2010's.

There is also the question of Iraq and its large Shiite population. This will also come into play should the Americans bring in the B-2 bombers. If Iran decides to respond with fury rather than resignation it's likely that Iraq itself will also explode - with regional repercussions as well. Only a rapid collapse of the Tehran regime might prevent this.

Though it's still a distant prospect, I have noted that the US has recently been attempting to reach out to the nations of Central Asia. Zbigniew Brzezinski's The Grand Chessboard (published in 1997) outlined plans for Central Asia. It focused on its geopolitical importance but also the question of resources. And this must not be forgotten. All contemporary wars have a resource angle to them and the present conflict is no exception. Iran itself is a tremendous prize with some of the biggest oil reserves on the planet. Should they fall into Western hands it would represent a blow to the likes of China - who presently purchases 90% of Iran's oil. Take that in for a moment and think about what that means to the strategists in Washington that spend every waking moment thinking of ways to weaken, block, and defeat Beijing.

Additionally, consider the following. Brzezinksi wrote his work in the context of a hostile Iran. The only avenue for Western financed pipelines out of Central Asia was through Afghanistan to the coast of Pakistan. By the 2010's this vision was dead. Pakistani-American relations had collapsed and the war in Afghanistan had become a quagmire. Large-scale fighting had ended, but the West could not guarantee security for pipelines. The insurgency could not be defeated and the West was unwilling to spend the money to permanently base the vast numbers of troops required for a heavy occupation.

But now, with the possibility of Iran opening up, there's the potential for a direct route from Central Asia to the Persian Gulf. The geopolitics have shifted, thus tweaking Brzezinski's model, but it's starting to come back into focus from a different angle.

And if Central Asia is opened back up to the West - then the original Mackinder-inspired Heartland scenario is back in play and the US can (in theory) once again contend with Russia and particularly China for the mastery of Eurasia and the world.

Israel is America's proxy in the region and while Netanyahu may push the envelope, Tel-Aviv does not act independently. The US can stop Israel at any time. Netanyahu has his allies within the American Right and leverages them and the tensions within American politics to his advantage but he is not autonomous. Some have speculated as to whether he tries to force Trump's hand. This may be so, but if he's successful it's merely do the superiority of his cunning as opposed to the bumbling ineptitude of Donald Trump who doesn't know how to wield power. The War with Iran is already America's war - even if this is not publicly acknowledged and even if the US decides to not directly employ its forces - which it already has on the periphery and in a support role. The US is directly responsible for Netanyahu's butchery in Gaza and bears just as much of the blame.

Another factor that is starting to loom large with regard to US involvement is the rapidly depleting missile supply in Israel for its Iron Dome. The US will have to resupply them and very soon or they will run out of defensive missiles - possibly within two weeks. Some have even mused as to whether Tehran is employing a considerable number of dummy missiles in order to deplete their supply - at which point Tehran can really turn up the heat on Israel. They've already proven they can get around Iron Dome to some extent and it cannot stop their hypersonic missiles. The open question is with regard to what is the state and quantity of Tehran's available arsenal. And also if the Iron Dome is defeated, you can be sure they will target the Iron Dome missile launchers to ensure it cannot easily be reconstituted. The Houthis at that point would certainly start launching missiles again - and this is yet another scenario in which the war could expand to the wider region.

For Iran, the only hope is that Israel will step back - which would mean the end for Netanyahu and thus he has every motive to continue. Should Iran manage to assassinate him, it's hard to say what would happen. Israel's internal political situation might explode - to Tehran's advantage. Or, the radicals in Tel Aviv might seize power and drop a nuclear bomb - unless the Americans intervene and stop them. There are a lot of possibilities and most of them are dramatic.

Iran from 1953-1979 was limited in terms of geopolitics by the Cold War and the fact that the Soviet Union was on its northern border - on both sides of the Caspian Sea. That is not the situation today. The spectre of Russia looms over the question but Azerbaijan is in the Western camp and Turkmenistan is not wholly committed to any bloc. This is where Türkiye as a proxy for the US was supposed to come in under the aegis of Pan-Turkism and that element of the earlier equation is still missing as Ankara under Erdogan is no longer on board with US foreign policy objectives.

The other fact that has modified the situation (as compared to Brzezinski's original vision) is the rise of the EU and its insertion into the economics of Central Asia. But if anything this simply gives Western aspirations a few more options.

This may all be moot. Until the present conflict is resolved, these questions remain theoretical. And the instability generated by a civil war would place all such plans on hold - as it did in Afghanistan during the 2001-2021 American War.

There's so much happening right now but these questions are hovering in the background and provide a great deal to think about. Unfortunately American Evangelicals due to the heresy of Dispensationalism are rabid in their support of the Zionist state, its genocide in Gaza, and its attack on Iran. I can only imagine the rubbish and filth being spewed from pulpits this coming Sunday. This is but another aspect of the war - but perhaps the one most pertinent to Bible believers. When phoney Christians like Ted Cruz advocate war with Iran and quote Genesis 12 in support of it, he needs to be denounced and called to account for his errors - heresies which justify evil deeds and mass slaughter all in the name of Christ.