As we all read, the European Union declared that negotiations with the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) failed big time. Well, we heard this before and yet the Europeans returned to the negotiations. But I’ve to say that, personally, I’m more confident that the EU has finally realized that the Mullahs have been taking it into a ride for years. Too bad that it took Mr. Ahmadinejad’s Nazi statements for the Euros to realize what was and is a policy of the totality of the regime.

First of all, let me make something clear: all the members of the Islamic Republic – including the so-called ‘reformists’ a la Khatami – believe that Israel must be wiped off the map and the earth as well. Each Mullah believes that “Holocaust is a myth”. During his presidency, Khatami had often met with the Hezbollah and Hamas and, introducing the Friday prayers, invited the fanatic crowd to shout “Death to America, Death to Israel.”

The only difference existing between the Ahmadinejad likes and the Khatami likes is that the first say openly what they strongly believe; the latter prefer to say it in Farsi while preaching ‘dialogue among civilizations’ when speaking in English. This is a tactic — approved by the ‘supreme leader’ Khamenei — that seems to have worked well (at least with the Europeans and the Japanese).

Now that the Europeans woke up in front of this deceive-and-rule game, we’re all waiting to see what will be next. My humble opinion is that, despite their statements claiming the opposite – Russia and China will veto a likely U.S.-E.U. joint resolution at the UN Security Council. Obviously, I hope I’m dead wrong. But it looks like the Russians and Chinese are not willing to loose their economic deals with the Islamic regime in case they renounce to veto the resolution.

Ok, let us for one moment imagine the resolution passes. That will be a very big blow to the Islamic regime and a victory not only for the international community, but for the Iranian people as well. It might very well weaken the regime; the Iranian people are in their majority in favor of strenghtening the sanctions. But there’s a but: the U.N. sanctions shouldn’t include banning the Iranian national team from the upcoming World Cup Soccer games. Here’re the main reasons:

1) The Iranian National team is cheered by milions of Iranians, including those who hate the regime. Banning it would hurt the Iranians’ nationalistic feelings.

2) Whenever a soccer game is played by the Iranian team, anti-regime protests always occur, both inside and outside the stadiums. As the SMCCDI (which coordinates the post-match anti-regime protests) reports, during the last World Cup games, there have been numerous clashes between the regime forces and the young Iranian fans who shouted anti-regime slogans and the women were seen also protesting (Iranian women aren’t allowed in the stadiums, while foreign women are, even though they’re forced to wear the mandatory veil). Banning Iran from the World Cup would be a favor to the regime, which wouldn’t fear any popular uprising following the games. That’s why the Iranian oppositions, while hoping for U.N. sanctions, are also hoping that they don’t include a ban on Iran’s participation to the World Cup this summer.

Now, let us analyze a scenario where U.N. failed to impose sanctions because of Russian or Chinese veto (that I see very likely):a military confrontation, with Israeli planes striking Iranian nuclear targets.

That is what I see most probable in case of failure at the Security Council.

I and many Iranian opposition groups agree that this must be averted as it would be highly counter-productive. Iran is not Iraq. Iraq, as well as Afghanistan, couldn’t be freed without a military intervention. Thus, war there has been a moral duty other than the only viable strategy. As Regime Change Iran explains in a few lines, a military strike against Iran:

– would risk to rally even the anti-regime Iranians around the regime as we all saw during the Iran-Iraq war. Nationalistic feelings are very strong in Iran.

– would strengthen the regime because the target would be the nuclear facilities, and not the Mullahs

– would not end the nuclear crisis; it would only delay it. The regime (which would be still in power) would have all the time to re-organize and fulfill its death mission and soon it would have the bomb

Anyway, let me tell frankly, hoping I’m right: the military option is being taken into consideation but I don’t believe that it will occur anytime soon. It’s more about a sort of ‘psichological war’ justly waged by the democratic world against the Islamic Republic to pressure it to give up ( even though the Mullahs will never give up their deadly dream to destroy the ‘infidels’ by using their atomic arsenal ). I think that the West, above all the U.S. and Israel ( whose President Moshe Katzav and Defense Minister Shaoul Mofaz are proud Iranian Jews as they admitted, speak Farsi fluently and often chat with their countrymen inside Iran through the Iranian Jewish radio stations ) knows that a military action is highly unproductive.

So what? While we hope that the resolution passes, if it doesn’t there’s an only viable solution: regime change.

That — it must be reminded — will be work of the Iranian people , but of course not without the financial and political assistance by the democratic world, with the U.S. at the forefront.

I happened to read some few comments by people who don’t know much about Iran (it’s not their fault after all), according to which “we always hear people saying that Iranians are going to get rid of the regime but it never occurs”.

The sad truth is that hundreds of Iranians have been killed in popular uprisings since 1999, yet the international community stood by and nothing more than it. President Bush is the first U.S. President to have publicly stated that “as you stand for your freedom, we stand with you”. The Iranian people are daily risking their lives by taking to the streets and facing the brutal fascist Bassiji and Ansar Hebzollah militias. It should have led President Bush to back his wise words with concrete action by clandestinely financing the uprisings and the genuine opposition groups coordinating the protests. Instead of doing that, Iranians have been arrested or killed and there has been no serious action taken by the U.S. (I don’t mention Europe, given that we cannot except anything good from a Continent that is after oil and business deals rather than human rights).

How in the world can some people think that Iranians are able to face the death squads without any international support?

Finally, let me dismiss the official claims made by the mainstream media according to which “Iranians support the nuclear ambitions of the regime.”

There’s nothing more false than this.

First of all, the Iranian people are known for being the most pro-US and even pro-Israel population in the region and Asia in general; second, those who were interviewed and declared their support for the nukes are either the Bassiji ‘students’ or people supporting the so-called ‘reformists.’

The majority of the Iranians don’t support a nuclear Islamic Republic, as they are well aware that this is what the regime counts on to remain in power and strenghten its system.

However, they would support a nuclear Iran if – and only if — a secular and democratic regime would be ruling in place of the Nazi one currently occupying this wonderful country.

The problem is not the nuclear energy; it’s who handles it. While the Nazi Islamist regime has, since its very beginning, made of the destruction of Israel its ultimate goal, a secular and democratic system would use it to produce energy

We all wait and see what will happen. But Regime Change is the only viable alternative. The Western nations are looking for an exit strategy (about the nuclear issue). Why don’t they take a regime change strategy into consideration?

UPDATE: Mani Arymand and Setareh Kavian of Marze Por Gohar ( Iranians for a Secular Republic ) wrote two must-read op-eds here and here .

Stefania also blogs at Free Thoughts.