This is how the ‘rules-based order’ collapses. Slowly, then suddenly. Unless Trump plans to carpet-nuke Tehran, then Iran simply wins.
This agreement does not – at least from the initial public texts – constitute a formal mutual defence treaty akin to NATO’s Article 5, obligating one to defend the others militarily
Genuinely though it seems like it should??? It might actually get the US to back off if Russian and Chinese missiles were pointed at them if they touch Iran.
Neither China nor Russia are willing to end the world for Iran which is what would be required. The US obviously knows this too hence would not be dissuaded. All an article 5 like agreement would do is weaken China’s position as a growing alternate pole when the US invade and China doesn’t press the button.
An agreement to work around sanctions and help Iran guarantee development is much more beneficial for everyone.
Also article 5 wasn’t designed with the idea of ever protecting against nuclear powers, it’s purpose is to intimidate imperialisms victims out of being too uppity and fighting back too far.
Also article 5 wasn’t designed with the idea of ever protecting against nuclear powers, it’s purpose is to intimidate imperialisms victims out of being too uppity and fighting back too far.
No, that’s what NATO’s been retooled into. NATO, and article 5, were designed with the idea of encircling and “protecting against” the USSR
While true at the surface it was more to fight against groups funded by the USSR (such as in Afghanistan) to contain influence gains as far as I’m aware at least.
Which is a slight but very important distinction as it meant direct nuclear power clashes were far less likely and action even if perfunctory could be taken to avoid being seen as unreliable as it was against proxies, even if it became incredibly close at times.
For example if the US was arming Syria to invade Iran as opposed to doing it itself an Article 5 style agreement would make a lot more sense.
Watch Danny Haiphong’s last interview with Ali Alizadeh. He points out the reason why Russia/China are not eager to form a stronger pact with Iran. There are two factions within Iran, the Conservatives and Liberal Reformists. The Liberal Reformists are always looking to normalize and build stronger ties with the West, including the USA. Every time Russia/China offers stronger ties with Iran, the liberals will just stall. Not sure if it’s true, but he points out that the last time Xi Jinping visited Iran, he was put in a hotel room that didn’t even have a working toilet. I would think the strong Iranian oligarchs are part of the liberal reformists, since they have a lot of assets in the West.
I’m sure that definitely contributes to it. But entering a game of chicken when everybody already knows where your line is is simply a bad idea and I’m sure the CPC and Russian government realize that as well.
