Heckoffajob, George - Iran Replaces US As Middle East Power

From the UK's Independent TV News:

A report claims Iran's influence in the Middle East has increased as a result of America's war on terror.

The report is called Iran, Its Neighbours And Regional Crises and it is written by researchers at the Royal Institute for International Studies in London, known as Chatham House.

It says: "There is little doubt that Iran has been the chief beneficiary of the war on terror in the Middle East.

"The United States, with Coalition support, has eliminated two of Iran's regional rival governments - the Taleban in Afghanistan in November 2001 and Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq in April 2003 - but has failed to replace either with coherent and stable political structures."

Rupert Murdoch's big-ciculation UK tabloid, The Sun, has even more, quoting the report as saying that "Iran is simply too important - for political, economic, cultural, religions and military reasons - to be treated lightly by any state in the Middle East or indeed Asia." It's difficult to ignore the Royal Institute for International Studies even if you are a Murdoch rag - it is the premier British foreign policy think-tank. Murdoch's quality broadsheet, the London Times, also covers the report.

The Chatam House report claims that:

Iran's influence in Iraq has superseded that of the US, and it is increasingly rivalling the US as the main actor at the crossroads between the Middle East and Asia. Its role within other war- torn areas such as Afghanistan and southern Lebanon has now increased hugely. This is compounded by the failure of the US and its allies to appreciate the extent of Iran’s regional relationships and standing - a dynamic which is the key to understanding Iran’s newly found confidence and belligerence towards the West. As a result, the US-driven agenda for confronting Iran is severely compromised by the confident ease with which Iran sits in its region.

The report also says that "despite his popularity, Ahmadinejad neither holds an insurmountable position within Iran nor commands universal support for his outspoken foreign policy positions."

You can read the full report here (PDF).

On related themes-

The NY Times has a report on the "crisis of confidence" Afghanis are feeling about President Karai "and by extension the American-led effort to rebuild that nation" in the face of corruption and a resurgent Taliban.

While the Belfast Telegraph says that over half of British troops in Iraq are slated to say there indefinitely. Even after all areas under British security control have been handed back to Iraqis - should that ever happen - 4,000 troops would be kept at a base in Basra. The reason, according to the usual unnamed official sources, is to "protect our investment".

Nice to see it spelled out plainly and simply, eh?