Hijacking US Foreign Policy by Generals

David Petraeus in his interview with CNN called Iran government as thugocracy. Apart from the bad languages that the General used we can trace that the comments and opinions which the United States commanders are giving about Iran is escalating. This is of course is a signal. It means that the US non military officials like the State Department or the White House have been undermined by the Pentagon and the status of US military has increased in US foreign policy. Of course the US officials should be concerned about; this did not even happen during Bush neo conservative administration.
What is important in the regard of US-Iran relations is that such matter can exacerbate the situation because the US does not have the true understanding from Iran and of course the US commanders’ perception from Iran is much more beyond from Iran’s realities. It can definitely endanger the US interests in the region and can push it into a more chaotic situation. On the other hand it can be a signal to Iran that emphasizes on the possibility of an attack. In this case certainly the Obama's foreign policy which has been hijacked by the Generals like Petraeus, Michael Mullen, McChrystal etc enters into the dire which situation which can topple down the democrats sooner than they perceive.

Iraq election and Iran

Parliamentary system in Iraq increases the importance of the election in this country because it has great role in determination of the future Iraqi government. Of course it has the internal and foreign implications for the country and the region. The Iraq-Iran relation is one of the issues which can be impressed by the election. After the collapsing the Saddam regime, Iran has had good relations with the Iraqi government. Some special and even personal relations between the officials of the countries contributed having strong liaison. But there is some historical misunderstands which can change the situation. Although both countries are Shiite but the religion is not the only linking factor, however some Sunni states in the region has warned the forming Shiite crescent in the region in order to shape the Iran's hegemony. There are some independent variables in the relations of the two states which are important regardless of the kind of governments in the states.

1. Iran emphases on the democracy and democratic procedures in Iraq because of the majority Shiite in Iraq. This factor is in contradiction with the authoritarian Arab states positions in the region. In this case even the United States disagrees with the democracy because it makes the Shiite come into power in Iraq.

2. Because the United States is the most adversaries of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the US presence in Iraq, Iran should pursue the limited crisis policy in Iraq which it means the remaining some level of tensions and unrest in this country in order to balance and manage its antagonistic relations with the united states.

3. Iran and Iraq have some unsolved issues such as 8 year war compensations, border discord, etc which Iran because of its special relations has not demanded them and kept them intact. Iran should follow the Realpolitik in these matters as well. It seemed if the secular or U.S oriented government in Iraq come to power Iran can demand its request better although this is not Iran's policy today. Iran prefers to encounter with its friend in Iraq.

4. Iran's ties with Iraq, Syria and to some extent turkey can shape the new geopolitical situation in the region which the Arab states are the loser of that.