Iran has the right not to tolerate American bases around it

Iran has the right not to tolerate American bases around it Reza Nasri / International lawyer Just as Russia does not tolerate NATO forces advancing to its borders and is justified in this stance, Iran also has every right not to accept the establishment of a ring of U.S. military bases in the surrounding Arab countries. These bases were not built for defense. They were established with the aim of exerting pressure on Iran, threatening its security, and serving as tools for permanent coercion. The most obvious consequence of this situation has been the militarization of the Strait of Hormuz. This waterway, which under any reasonable interpretation of international law should remain a neutral passage open to ships from all countries, has been turned into a military corridor by the United States itself. By maintaining a permanent naval presence and exercising military power from these bases, Washington has transformed a trade route into a scene of intimidation and then blamed the instability resulting from this very situation on Iran. Iran is not the only target of this dangerous and irresponsible approach. The same network of bases and naval deployments that surround Iran is equally designed to exert control over the maritime routes upon which China's economy relies. A significant portion of China's energy needs passes through the Strait of Hormuz, and Washington believes that by placing this vital artery under constant military oversight, it not only gains leverage against Tehran but also against Beijing. From this perspective, the Persian Gulf represents another front within a grand containment strategy. The difference in the behavior of the two countries is instructive. While the United States showcases military power, establishes military bases, and turns trade into a tool for pressure, China has engaged with the region through investment, trade, and diplomacy. The most obvious example of this approach was China's role in mediating reconciliation among the Gulf countries, rather than obstructing it. A foreign policy based on development and mutual interests stands in stark contrast to a policy grounded in organized coercion. The only path to achieving sustainable peace in the region passes through the withdrawal of these foreign bases. If Arab countries genuinely desire security, their interests lie not in hosting American garrisons but in dismantling them and creating a local security order alongside their neighbors. The rational and pragmatic argument in favor of this approach is undeniable. Decades of U.S. military presence has not brought the security promised to these countries nor the protective umbrella that was supposed to allow them to focus on economic development and prosperity. These bases have made Arab countries less secure and the region more dangerous. Security cannot be imported; it must be built internally by the countries themselves that live with the consequences. The Arab countries of the region hold their future in their own hands. The sooner they decide to take control of it, the better it will be for them.