Ahlul Bayt (AS) International News Agency – ABNA: Matthew Hoh is a US Navy veteran of the Iraq War and a former State Department officer who served in the Afghanistan War. In 2009, after being appointed to a position at the State Department, he resigned from his post in Afghanistan in protest against the escalation of the Afghanistan war by the Obama administration. He now works as an analyst and commentator on foreign policy and military affairs, serving as a senior fellow at the Eisenhower Media Network.
This former US State Department official, in an interview with ABNA News Agency, elaborated on America's war against Iran, explaining the dimensions of Washington's defeat and the aspects of Iran's victory in this war.
Iran-Oman Agreement Consolidates Tehran's Victory in the War
In response to a question about a possible agreement between Iran and Oman regarding maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, Matthew Hoh said: We have not yet seen the details of the Iran-Oman agreement and only have a general idea of its outline; based on which Iran controls the northern entrance to the Persian Gulf and also shares control of the exit. This, of course, is a framework that provides stability for trade in and out of the Persian Gulf for years or decades to come.
He added: However, the significance of this agreement, particularly for me, lies in Iran's control over what enters the Persian Gulf, which effectively halts American warships as well as vessels intended to supply US bases in the region. This aspect of the agreement between Iran and Oman truly consolidates and solidifies Iran's victory in this war, and this development will have a profound impact on the Americans and their ability to maintain their forces in the Middle East, and will naturally lead to the further transfer of American forces to Israel and Jordan, because the bases they had across the Persian Gulf, in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Qatar, are now in a precarious situation.
Now, whether this agreement between Iran and Oman will hold depends largely on this war and whether the United States decides to accept this agreement or not.
Trump Is Loyal Only to Himself
Hoh continued, in response to a question about the impact of the war and developments such as the closure of the Strait of Hormuz on the US midterm elections and Donald Trump's position, and what measures he would be forced to take to prevent these consequences, saying: That is an interesting question, because we do not see Donald Trump as a figure who is very concerned about the midterm elections. In fact, he has explicitly stated that he is not very worried about the economy and the financial conditions of American families, and this is truly quite different from how his predecessors operated or what was expected of them.
So, as you know, this is one of Donald Trump's characteristics; he is irrational, indecisive, crazy, and certainly does not follow any clear path tied to an ideology, institution, or structure of power. Trump is loyal only to himself.
This means that the president was expected, even just to save face, to do whatever it takes to get out of this war, which is deeply unpopular in the United States and has economic consequences for the American people; whether by declaring victory and pulling American forces out of the region, or by stopping the war, or by entering into an agreement, or by engaging in a genuine political and diplomatic solution to the war, for example by adhering to the memorandum of understanding he signed a few months ago. But at present, we do not see such an approach.
Therefore, Donald Trump's unpredictability, his irrationality, and the ambiguity and uncertainty he brings to the Middle East war are also being felt by Americans as the November elections approach.
Trump and War Reparations; Playing with Headlines
The American veteran continued, in response to a question about whether Trump's claim of receiving war reparations from Iran due to the war in the region is a kind of acknowledgment of Iran's military power and whether this claim is fundamentally true, saying:
I do not think Donald Trump's demand that Iran pay reparations to the United States, on the pretext of real or imaginary damages inflicted on the country over past decades, justifies his position; rather, in my opinion, this was nothing more than a gesture and a show by the US president, and merely reflects his effort to keep headlines in his favor and control the narrative.
This is the most important thing to understand about Trump, and it is actually related to his personal control. He wants to be the one who starts and ends wars; he wants to be the one who announces the start or end of negotiations. He wants to be the one who says negotiations are ongoing or negotiations have been suspended. He wants to determine the flow of the narrative and headlines through his messages, and in this case, he wants to be seen as the one setting the terms for ending this war.
Therefore, I do not take Trump's demand for reparations seriously, and I fully understand that it was merely a show on his part and hollow, baseless rhetoric.
Americans Are Not Trustworthy!
He further stated, regarding speculation about Iran-US negotiations and the possibility of reaching an agreement and how durable any agreement would be: I do not think any agreement would be durable. I highly doubt that an agreement would actually be signed. I do not see an agreement that would provide a permanent solution to the war as possible.
In my opinion, the United States, for reasons tied to the political realities of the American empire, will not make such concessions, and Iran will not give any of the concessions the Americans want, because it has won this war and they are the ones in control of the situation.
Therefore, I do not think we will see an agreement signed, and if one is signed, it will be similar to what happened with the memorandum of understanding, where the US canceled the agreement after just a few weeks or maybe two months, and simply disregarded it.
I was shocked from the very beginning by the signing of the memorandum of understanding. So, I think any agreement the Americans sign under this administration will not be trustworthy, and as long as there is no change—at least in the White House—there must be an understanding in Iran that your security and sovereignty will be based solely on your deterrence; whether that deterrence is achieved through military campaigns, economic warfare, or diplomatic efforts remains to be seen.
But I say that no agreement has been signed in the United States under this administration that they have adhered to or that you could trust. Therefore, I do not believe an agreement will be reached, and if one is reached, it will certainly not be durable, because Americans are not trustworthy.
Iran Imposed Its Military Superiority on the US and Israel in the War
Matthew Hoh, speaking about Iran's achievements in the war imposed by the US and Israel, said: Iran's achievements in this war were immense. I mean particularly in the military dimension. You witnessed the Iranian army fight both symmetrically and asymmetrically, and not only did it not reach a stalemate, but in fact, in some respects, it gained the upper hand over the Israelis and Americans. They forced the Americans to evacuate their bases across the Persian Gulf. They forced the US Navy to withdraw a thousand kilometers from Iran's coasts. The Iranians fought the Americans and Israelis in a way that inverted their military doctrine. This is not only important for Iran or the Middle East, but it is important for the entire world.
He added: This development shows that US military doctrine, as well as its weapons, in the twenty-first century are incapable of winning a war. Therefore, this has a global impact and shows the world that the US military is very superficial and can only be skilled in the role of a colonial police force.
America may be skilled at carrying out occupations that it eventually is forced to leave in places like Iraq or Afghanistan; it may be able to continue disastrous proxy wars in places like Libya and Syria, but in reality, it cannot win a modern war in the twenty-first century against a nation, especially a nation that has shown it is prepared and serious about having a position as a global power.
Iran's Political Achievements; Beyond the Battlefield
The American veteran said: I think this is another achievement for Iran, showing that it is a global power; not only because of its distinguished geographical position north of the Strait of Hormuz, based on which it can control the traffic entering and exiting the Persian Gulf, but also because it has capable and competent leadership that was able to prepare for this war, ready its economy, ready its industry, and also identify the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of its enemies.
He continued: Therefore, understanding the weaknesses of the Americans, the Israelis, and the Arab countries, but rather understanding the vulnerabilities of the global economic system and then formulating a strategy that can pressure that system to reach a political outcome, is a very important matter.
You see that the Iranians not only brought great political pressure on the American coalition and even on their relations with their subordinate countries across the Middle East and the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf, but you also saw this political pressure across the world.
For example, Pete Hegseth, the US Secretary of Defense, said he wants to expel Spain from NATO. He raised all sorts of issues between Europe and the United States over the past six months that exacerbated tensions that already existed. The same applies to Japan, South Korea, and other Pacific and Asian countries; countries that are severely suffering from this shock, the global energy shock, and the political pressures that have overshadowed the United States and its relations with those countries.
Hoh concluded: Therefore, I think there are many aspects we can address regarding the Iranians' achievements, including military achievements. But there are also very important political achievements that will play a role not only in determining Iran's relations with its neighbors in the Middle East and the world, but also in shaping the future of the Middle East and the overall trajectory of the declining American empire, which will also be affected by these circumstances.
Your Comment