
Roger Boyd

| Traducir—Translate! | |
| Make fonts bigger>>> | Resize text-+= |
Iran's Calculus: The West Will Only Get Weaker Over Time
The calculus for China, Russia and Iran is that the West is in long-term decline so they win by not being dragged into a possibly disastrous conflict. Russia was forced into a war with the proxy Ukraine due to the impending invasion of the Donbass by the Ukrainian army (presaged by an intensifying artillery barrage and concentration of Ukrainian forces opposite the Donbass), but it had gained eight years in which to strengthen its ability to withstand the inevitable Western attempts to destroy it economically and financially. China has skilfully stayed out of a conflict over Taiwan while its strength builds and that of the US (and its Western vassals) declines.
Iran is in the same position with respect to its deepening alliances with both China and Russia, and its developing position as a major transport hub between east and west, and north and south. In the week before the Israeli aggression, the first train had run on the line connecting China and Iran. Work also continues on the north-south transportation corridor between Russia and Iran. The previous withdrawal of the West from Afghanistan greatly reduced the threat to Iran along its eastern border.
The West was caught in a colossal miscalculation in believing that a regime change in Iran could be triggered by their surprise attack that had been jointly planned (the US and UK fingerprints are all over it) for perhaps a year or more. Instead, as with Russia, war has greatly strengthened the regime. The Supreme Leader is more popular than ever, the people of Iran more behind their government than ever, and the liberal willing vassal fifth column isolated. The government will now be able to fix the shortcomings exposed by the Western surprise attack, and be able to root out the fifth columnists in its midst; a significant proportion of the Western intelligence agencies’ terrorist cells have already been exposed and shut down.
The Trump administration showed the economic and financial limitations placed upon it by the deep levels of both government and private indebtedness, the sclerotic and inefficient nature of its monopolistic, corrupt and rentier corporate sector, and the financial precariousness of the vast majority of the US population. It could not risk the escalation in oil and gas prices that would result from a wider war with Iran, which would also greatly damage its vassals while greatly strengthening Russia; while China would ride out any such oil shock in much better shape. So it carried out a meaningless strike upon Iran and has now “declared victory and gone home”; while not taking action against the Chinese purchases of Iranian oil. At the same time what was left of US soft power outside the West has been shredded, and its legitimacy even in the West undermined, while Iran has gained greatly through its strong but measured responses.
This is not Iraq in the 1990s, a much smaller, more exposed and internationally isolated country already weakened by eight years of war against Iran and low oil prices; further weakened by the extensive sanctions following the First Gulf War. At a time when the US was at its zenith of power, China was still a poor nation and Russia was experiencing the massive decline of the 1990s. Iran, and BRINCISTAN (Belarus, Russia, Iran, North Korea, China, Iraq, and the Central Asian “Stans”), will only get stronger over time while the US and its Western vassals become weaker. Will the “cease fire” be a messy one given the Zionist regime’s lack of respect for any agreement? Yes, but it gains more time for Iran as the Zionist regime weakens along with its Western big brothers.
The reality of missiles raining down on them rather than the hapless Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians has been an existential shock to the worldview of most, especially the liberal Zionists of Israel. The state can no longer guarantee the Brooklyn-On-The-Mediterranean project, where the messiness of the ethnic cleansing and genocide happen somewhere else out of sight and out of mind. While the liberal Zionists enjoy their high standard of living (heavily subsidized by the West), life in a big city like Tel Aviv, and the beaches of the Mediterranean. Domestically, they have already been confronted by the increasing power of the Haredi and Mizrahi to create a fundamentalist religious supremacist society that will not have any tolerance for their liberal values. A Zionist-ISIS-On-The-Mediterranean rather than a Brooklyn. This has already lead to a near civil war in the country between the liberals and the fundamentalists. And now the peace of “Brooklyn” has been shattered by the very obvious inability of the Israeli air defences to keep out Iranian missiles and even drones; an “Iron Sieve” rather than an “Iron Dome”. Such realities will not only affect the liberal Zionists but also the corporate planning processes that decide where corporations locate their activities; to the great disadvantage of Israel.
With the outgoing flights from Israel now being restored, we should not be surprised to see an ongoing emigration of the liberal Zionists back to their real homelands which are predominantly in Europe, North America and Russia. Together with an outflow of corporate offices and investments. Israel is now in a process of ongoing weakening, while its big brothers decline in stature with respect to BRINCISTAN and the wider loose coalition of nations that is growing around it. Less than ten years from now the geopolitical world will be a very different place, and Iran will stand stronger within it. Israel may be a shadow of its current self, even cast aside by a growing majority of the US Jewish population and further losing support as the US Christian Zionist population declines.
Subscribe to Geopolitics And Climate Change
Print this article [bws_pdfprint display=’print’]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License •
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS



3 comments
Finally, an analyst who is trying to integrate energy and climate issues into geopolitical considerations.
He knows that closure of Hormuz will damage the US economy for more than the Chinese economy. Why?
I cannot repeat this enough:
The USA may be a high GROSS producer of lousy EROEI unconventional oil (LTO, NOT petroleum) and lousy EROEI unconventional gas, but it is a low NET producer of oil and gas.
The USA needs imported petroleum (primarily the diesel fraction) to extract domestic unconventional oil and gas, and it gets the former free due to its petrodollar privilege.
No petrodollar privilege, no domestic US production of oil and gas. Simple.
Note that the workhorse fractions of petroleum, which are diesel and jet fuel (=low sulphur kerosene), CANNOT be made from US LTO unless blended with heavier, higher density imported petroleum or Athabascan tar sand fractions and the latter is also unconventional super expensive poor EROEI scammery.
I am so frustrated that I am unable to get people to understand these indisputable FACTS based on hard Physics, Chemistry and Geophysical REALITIES, truths about oil and gas which have TREMENDOUS geopolitical/economic implications.
Truths that the fossil fuel scammers are dead set on keeping the public ignorant about.
NO ENERGY = NO ECONOMY = MASS HUMAN DIEOFF
A geopolitical economist who is blind to energy matters is like a pilot-navigator who does not look at his fuel gauge.
A geopolitical economist who is blind to climate change and ecodestruction issues is like a pilot-navigator who does not look at his storm radar displaying a massive thunderstorm ahead.
Both are partially blind, fatally so.
Chris Hedges is a brilliant geopolitical analyst who unfortunately lacks even a proper awareness of economic matters, much less any understanding of energy or climate science or ecology.
He wrote a hopelessly despairing piece regarding the outlook for the Gazans which I debunked here
https://scheerpost.com/2025/06/16/the-last-days-of-gaza-read-by-eunice-wong/#comment-117314
His view is limited by lack of understanding of wider economic and energy issues which I mentioned here:
https://scheerpost.com/2025/06/14/chris-hedges-the-folly-of-a-war-with-iran/#comment-117236
As an example of ignorance of the nature of oil geophysics and chemistry and economics that taint one’s judgement, I would like to comment on this interview with Dr Paul Craig Roberts who is an esteemed economist and former US government advisor/insider and widely considered a realist astute geopolitical commentator.
He said in this interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olK178dNNIU
that the USA is more likely to close the Straits of Hormuz than Iran because the ultimate agenda of the USA is to hurt China and China will be much more adversely affected by curtailment of Persian Gulf oil exports than the USA.
The implicit assumptions behind his assertion are seriously flawed.
He thinks that the USA, being the world’s largest oil “producer”, will hardly be affected, but China, which may receive up to half of its oil via Hormuz, will be much more severely hurt.
Although it is true that China’s economy would be severely hurt, it is far more likely the USA’s economy would be much more severely hurt and much sooner.
These are the flaws in PCR’s assumptions, here is what he does know know or admit:
Oil output (production of LTO) domestically in the USA is dependent on imported inputs that facilitate the US production. The primary input without which there can be no shale oil output is DIESEL. USA’s oil production is basically LTO (think… paint thinner), the USA produces very little diesel. It is impossible to produce diesel from LTO unless blended from heavy petroleum imported fractions or super expensive tar sand fractions, also imported. Result: oil prices in the USA will skyrocket.
The USA is utterly dependent on diesel to run everything: long distance trucking, locomotives, all agricultural machinery, all mining and construction machinery etc. Alice Friedemann’s important book “When the trucks stop running”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-J58QAj3js outlines how utterly dependent the USA is on diesel, essentially everything grinds to a halt without diesel, which today is all essentially imported. Result: the entire US economy collapses.
Jet fuel also cannot be made from LTO and is largely imported. No jet fuel, no transcontinental high speed travel within the USA. Result: the US aviation industy collapses.
The USA’s strategic petroleum reserve has essentially been drawn down to a tiny puddle by the US government to keep prices at the pump down.
China by contrast has maintained a huge strategic petroleum reserve to last several months. Furthermore any severe sudden curtailment of petroleum to China will be managed by rationing to key sectors, to ensure basic systems continue to function and people do not face skyrocketing food prices. Furthermore much of China’s transportation system is electrified and powered by nuclear energy, coal or hydro. Hence the high speed cross country trains and the city metros will keep running and a large proportion of buses, taxis and personal vehicles will be unaffected, being electric these days.
China will continue to receive petroleum from Russia and now with its direct rail connection to Tehran, oil tankers can be delivered overland from Iran to China. Furthermore the Caspian sea states (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan etc) are major oil exporters and can also deliver oil overland to China. The USA does not have these options.
So whereas PCR is right that the USA may be motivated to close Hormuz based on the flawed thinking that he shares, the consequences of such closure will be vastly different to what he expects due to his lack of understanding of the geophysics and chemistry and economy of oil.
Eric, when you get a chance, send me your email address so we can communicate directly. And if you will, send me your bioblurb at tybaltpetronio624@gmail.com
Let me get my act together before getting back to you…
Meantime you can contact me with my email entered when comments are made.