Washington has taken further steps to increase pressure on
Tehran. This time, the White House, despite the negative impact of its
decisions on the global stage, has leveraged its political influence on Panama
to counter Tehran’s expansion of foreign policy.
The US has opted to exert pressure on Panama to prohibit
Iranian vessels, sanctioned by Washington, from flying its flag. During a visit
to Panama on Wednesday, Abram Paley, Deputy Special Envoy in the US Office of
the Special Envoy for Iran, stated that the measure aims to prevent ships from
being utilized for what he termed as illegal actions.
Paley emphasized in a statement that the US is endeavoring
to enhance the enforcement of sanctions as part of a broader diplomatic
outreach campaign. "Iran and affiliated entities are attempting to
circumvent sanctions here in Panama," he remarked. "They seek to
exploit Panama's flag registry."
"We anticipate that the Panamanian government will
continue to collaborate with us in accordance with their domestic legislation
and international commitments," Paley added.
Washington's recent action follows shortly after Iranian Oil
Minister Javad Owji declared that Tehran's oil sales would remain unaffected by
sanctions, even if Donald Trump were to win the US presidential elections in
November.
Panama leads globally in providing flags of convenience,
enabling shipping companies to register their vessels in countries with which
they have no connection — for a fee and exemption from oversight.
It appears that the White House intends to reinforce the
implementation of existing sanctions as the regional crisis escalates. This
move by Washington stands in stark contrast to what Washington's Iran hawks
call Biden's appeasement policy in West Asia.
The United States has consistently wielded its power as
leverage to advance its interests, regardless of the potential repercussions on
the regional and international scale. This approach is evident in the
consistent US formula for intervening in the policy-making systems of other
countries.
For instance, Washington's policy towards Caracas and the
imposition of sanctions on Venezuela have served as tools for intervening in
Venezuela's political system. Similarly, the US employs similar tactics in West
Asia, as evidenced by the array of American military bases in the region and
unwavering support for Tel Aviv. These actions reflect a policy that
prioritizes Washington's interests above all else, irrespective of their
broader effects.
The Biden Administration's pressure on Panama exemplifies
this approach, indicating that Washington is not inclined to pursue diplomatic
channels in its dealings with Iran. Instead, the primary objective appears to
be preventing the Islamic Republic of Iran from expanding its political
influence.
Despite the Biden administration's initial endorsement of a
more conciliatory policy in West Asia and its expressed willingness to revive
the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, formally called the JCPOA, the White House has
demonstrated a lack of political resolve to take concrete actions. Moreover,
the Biden administration has yet to lift any sanctions on Iran, failing to
demonstrate a tangible commitment to resolving issues through diplomatic means.
The recent US stance in Panama and its maneuver in the Red
Sea have triggered alarm bells regarding their potential ramifications on the
seamless flow of global trade. What emerges from these developments is a
pattern of US behavior wherein the pursuit of its own interests takes
precedence, even at the expense of disrupting international commerce.
Take, for instance, the situation in Panama. The US exertion
of pressure seems to transcend the immediate issue at hand, instead serving as
a means to constrain Iran's influence. This strategic maneuver underscores
Washington's inclination to prioritize geopolitical objectives over the broader
interests of global trade. Similarly, the US confrontational stance towards
certain factions in the Red Sea region has stirred unnecessary friction along a
crucial trade artery.
Such actions raise legitimate concerns about the US approach
to international affairs. By prioritizing its own objectives over collaborative
efforts aimed at fostering global economic stability, the US risks sowing seeds
of discord that could have far-reaching consequences. Indeed, this
prioritization of unilateral interests over multilateral cooperation threatens
to set off a chain reaction of instability, imperiling the very foundation upon
which the global economy rests.
As the world navigates through increasingly complex
geopolitical terrain, it becomes imperative for nations to uphold principles of
cooperation and mutual benefit. The recent US actions serve as a sobering
reminder of the dangers inherent in a myopic pursuit of national interests at
the expense of broader global imperatives. Only through concerted efforts to
promote dialogue, understanding, and collaboration can we hope to safeguard the
integrity of the global trade system and steer clear of the choppy waters of
economic uncertainty.
