Who is stirring up Iran? What can the US promise the Iranian people?

The demonstrations that began first in Lebanon and then in Iraq show that a new wave of change is coming in the Middle East through popular movements. The fact that both Beirut and Baghdad are two of the four Sunni capitals that Iran controls makes it inevitable that one target of the popular movements is also Iran. Because in both cities the established order that has continued in recent years forms a rigid status quo that proceeds largely under Iran's control and patronage. So much so that it was openly stated that one aim of the movements in Iraq was to influence Iran's interior.

Indeed, in the protesters' discourse, Iran and the pro-Iran actors in the country are among the primary targets. This situation causes the bloc that stands against Iran to support these demonstrations as well. Although the open support of these movements by the Gulf countries, which have never had a good relationship with street demonstrations or democratic movements, truly casts a shadow of intrigue over the demonstrations, in the end the countries have their own internal dynamics, and there are also masses of people who are badly suffering from this order that has continued for years.

In Lebanon there is a situation in which the administrative cadres determined according to ethnic, religious and sectarian quotas cannot in any way bring the two sides of the country together. The people think that this distribution of administration is the principal cause of all the economic problems and the corruption that have been experienced since the war, and they think that a new order based on equal citizenship, taking the individual as its basis independent of such quotas, is the only solution.

It must be seen that this demand for democracy is in fact not the ideal and demand either of the Gulf countries, which support the movement because it is against Iran, or of the USA. The USA has never had any inclination to want democracy in any Arab country. That is why the Lebanese people's present demands have dynamics far beyond the intrigue of any country.

The same applies to Iraq. Today in Iraq the regime established after the occupation imitated Lebanon with its model based on sectarian and ethnic quotas. As if it had succeeded in Lebanon. This regime, established under the patronage and supervision of the USA, was in fact presenting Iraq as it was to Iran as a gift on a golden platter.

Iran's influence did not form a model that would benefit Iraq and make all the people happy in Iraq, but operated so as to look after only its own interests. In the order in which this blatant Iranian influence operated, Iran began to be held responsible for all the corruption and inadequacies that arose. This situation, which at first disturbed only Sunnis, over time began to disturb all Iraqis, Shiites included, and with their discourse and criticisms directly targeting Iran, in the latest protests it was again Iraqi Shiites who took the lead.

Although this struggle for influence by Iran aims to look after its own interests, another problem that concerns Iran is that it brings little return to the Iranian people. In fact, in response to so many years of embargo and economic and political sanctions, Iran has developed a very special economy in terms of standing on its own feet. So much so that no economic sanction attempted against Iran can have a very effective result. Because Iran can supply by its own means many of the basic materials an economy can rely on. It has an extremely rich and high-quality agriculture, which frees it from dependence on the outside.

It has also developed capabilities in developing its own human resources that cannot be dismissed, and moreover despite so many sanctions and embargoes. While any Gulf country would probably not last three months if it were subjected to even a twentieth of the sanctions Iran is presently subjected to, Iran has managed to turn even sanctions into opportunities for its economy.

Nevertheless, a people also lives in Iran, and however much a significant part of this people identifies itself with the fate of its own country, a significant part is also seriously discontented. Raising fuel prices in Iran threefold overnight is in fact, from the Iranian regime's point of view, like a test of its own people's patience. Even though it could have done this gradually, doing it overnight is a kind of show of strength before the outside world. But it seems this show of strength costs somewhat dearly. Because the Iranian people's reaction to these price hikes was harsh. That is, the demonstrations rest on a rather provocative cause that comes not from outside but from within, from the government itself.

However, the statements that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made with great appetite over these demonstrations, "we stand with the Iranian people," are like the words of the undertaker who walks onto the stage at some point in a comedy film.

The USA has never stood with the Iranian people.

The USA has never stood with any people in the Middle East.

From time to time it merely used some peoples, but did not stand with them. It also dragged the peoples it used into disaster in a short time. As for the hardships the Iranian people are subjected to today, the great majority of them already stem from the USA's policies.