This short research paper excludes any possible military confrontation between Iran and America, before the break-up of the Revolutionary Guard contract, and Iran's return to the seventh item, and Iran's loss of the ability to launch a foreign war.

This paper also confirms that Trump's sanctions against Iran and its proxies aim to dismantle the infrastructure of the Revolutionary Guards' arms in its regional crescent in preparation for finding local allies for the international coalition.

And that Damascus, which is the mediator of the Iranian resistance axis, may be the first of the four capitals (Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut) to break up the Revolutionary Guard contract, in preparation for a scenario similar to the 1982 scenario of Lebanon.

Until then, which may pave the way for Iran's exit from Syria, Iraq may remain far from any possible confrontation between Iran and America's proxies, and unlike Beirut and Tehran, Baghdad and Damascus, for structural reasons, are the arena of potential confrontation.

While the paper assumes that Trump’s sanctions target the Revolutionary Guard’s social structure as a prelude to creating local allies, the problem of the paper is focused on researching the impact of Trump’s sanctions against the Revolutionary Guard’s arms, and the paper asks about the reasons why Damascus is the first capital and Baghdad is the second in any possible ignition of a spark confrontation.

The paper considers that harmony, tension, crisis and conflict are vital and dynamic affairs that develop according to time, place and events, and not every tension leads to a crisis, nor does every crisis necessarily lead to a conflict.

In any social or political environment, there are three factors that control the development of a state of harmony into conflict and vice versa, there are structural factors that fuel conflict (marginalization, terrorism, value collapse, scarcity of resources) and mediating factors that control the development of stages (governmental reform programs, civil society organizations) and Direct factors that fuel or ignite the conflict (violent government behavior against one of the components, a loose weapon, unbearable economic pressure).

When the pressure of Trump’s sanctions on Iran’s proxies reaches an intolerable level, popular discontent in the IRGC environment reaches an intolerable level as well, and the societal environment explodes until some of them are with/against IRGC proxies (Basra Intifada 2018, the explosion of people’s anger following the catastrophe of the phrase Mosul 2019).

According to this theorizing, the paper sees that local, regional and international conditions have matured or are almost ripe in Syria, which is under the domination of the allies of necessity (Iran and Russia) for a possible explosion.

Before talking about the reasons that lead to a possible explosion in Syria before Iraq, the paper must provide a necessary introduction to the American policy against Iran today.

America's policy against the Iranian regime today is almost similar to America's policy against Saddam Hussein's regime, and the essence of this policy is to create a level of tension (anxiety that precedes the crisis) that reaches the point of crisis (a sudden shift that represents a threat and requires an urgent decision) leading to armed conflict depending on the The behavior of Iraq in the past and Iran now.

And a quick comparison of the wording of Security Council Resolution 1441 of 11-8-2002 against Iraq, and the formula of Security Council Resolution 2231 of 07/14/2015 against Iran, which may refer to the seventh item after it came out of it without war, confirms that America’s policy against Iran is similar Its policy against Saddam Hussein's regime.

Therefore, the paper considers that the transition of the relationship between Iran and America from the degree of crisis to armed conflict depends on the behavior of the Iranian regime, which is waging a war of attrition in four capitals and at the same time facing unprecedented economic sanctions.

The observer of Iran’s behavior against Trump’s sanctions finds in it stubbornness and willingness to suppress any possible explosion in the environment of the regional Revolutionary Guards crescent (the statement of the commanders of the guards, Bashar’s summons to Tehran, Rouhani’s visit to Baghdad, the meeting with the chiefs of staff of Iran, Iraq and Syria, Bashar) and it is employed at the same time Popular anger against the Trump administration, once because of its sanctions, and another because of its war on the axis of resistance.

With its stubbornness and willingness, Iran prevents any country in its regional crescent, component or group from turning into a future enemy, and links it to the fate of the Iranian regime, continuity or collapse, making the Iranian regime a cornerstone in any decision issued by the capitals of its crescent, regarding local, regional or International.

Despite Iran’s normalization and subordination to the Sunni street and its control over the Shiite street, the land of Iraq and Syria remains mined under Iran’s feet, worried about an international and regional context hostile to it and from the ambiguous American policy against it in Iraq and the region, says (Hassan Danaei Fard), ambassador Iran is the former in Iraq.

And if we compare the four capitals Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus and Beirut, we will find that the possibilities of conflict in Baghdad and Damascus are much more likely than Beirut and Tehran, because of the presence of America in Iraq and Russia in Syria.

Also, one of the reasons why the Baghdad mines did not explode after Damascus is that Baghdad is the capital of an ally of the international coalition, unlike Damascus, and it has an international political process, unlike Damascus, which is stubborn to a political solution, and the lack of readiness of any local Shiite or Sunni ally against Iranian agents.

Without removing Iran from Syria and enabling America to drive a wedge in Iraq between Iran and Russia and preventing Baghdad from communicating with Iran and Syria, any potential confrontation in Iraq will remain postponed.

Postponing the confrontation in Iraq may be in the interest of Iran and America, reinforced by the presence of American bases in Iraq that Iran seeks to remove, but it is negotiating with calm in Iraq, focusing on Syria and looting Iraq.

So, (Aleppo) Iraq at this stage to resist the sanctions on the one hand, and focus on the continuation of its crescent and the protection of its contract and spearhead centered on Syria, Iran needs indispensable despite its danger, and that is why the Revolutionary Guards summoned Bashar and sent Rouhani to Baghdad.

As for the reasons that make Syria the first capital to ignite, Syria is not an ally of America, and the losses of any battle there will not cost America or its allies anything (and from here was Trump’s decision to withdraw from Syria), and the disintegration of the Revolutionary Guards environment there has become just around the corner. Inferior, as any battle will not cause a new migration.

In addition to the scarcity of resources in Syria, which is dominated by Iran and Russia, and America's sanctions against Bashar's regime, evidenced by the popular anger and the daily looting of Bashar's militias, the factors fueling the annexation of the Golan, Pompeo's speech against Hezbollah, and the deal of the century that will be announced next month.

It goes without saying that Israel entered the Syrian equation and targeted the Revolutionary Guard militias to protect its security from the Revolutionary Guard's missiles, which in the next stage may be one of the reasons that may ignite the confrontation.

The Russian-Israeli coordination has reached an unprecedented level by signing a written document to avoid any possible clash between the two parties in the coming period, especially after the end of the ISIS era, which may ignite the war between the strategic opponents brought together by the war on ISIS.

And the position of the Russians in any possible clash in Syria, between Syria loyal to Iran and hostile to it, will not be more than the position of the Russians with all the lords of resistance against Israel from Abdel Nasser to Arafat to Saddam Hussein. For allies at the last minute.

And Iran in the awaited Syrian battle is nothing more than a football between an American opponent and a Russian rule, which has been targeted by jihadist Islam in the Afghan model, and it is preparing today to avenge this strategic opponent in coordination with the opponents of Iran, America, Israel, as well as the Arabs, and against itself. Jant Baraqish.

America’s policy toward Iran, which is similar to its policy against Saddam’s regime, is focused today, as it did in the first Gulf War, on keeping Russia away from Iran and bringing the Arabs into the equation of confrontation against Iran (the Iraqi-Jordanian-Egyptian summit) and stopping and encouraging Arab rapprochement with Bashar’s regime with Baghdad.

The period from July 2019 to July 2020 may be a very critical period for Iran at a time when it is formulating a new structure for its regime. The Revolutionary Guards may assume the head of power, and they are betting on Trump losing the presidential elections, whose campaign will start in July 2020.

Pending the expiration of the American deadline on Iranian oil sanctions after next May, Brian Hook announced the formation of Arab-European-Israeli working groups to confront Iran at sea (Security Council Resolution 1929 in 2010 under Chapter VII, to which Iran may return later).

Trump's meeting with Netanyahu in Washington, and Netanyahu met Putin earlier, came to confirm the high-level US-Russian-Israeli coordination in Syria, and several international tripartite agreements were witnessed, including neither the Assad regime nor Iran.

This may be a prelude to the next stage of the confrontation with the axis of resistance. After Trump signed an American decision to annex the Golan to Israel, Russia warned of a new wave of violence in the Middle East.

Today, the international community is awaiting the development of the situation in Syria and the way Iran will react. It is also waiting for Iran to accept or reject the FATF agreement before next July.

And before next July comes, Britain, Germany and France have submitted, for the first time since the signing of the Lausanne Agreement, a complaint to the Security Council that will be presented next June, due to Iran’s violation of Resolution 2231, which may open the door to the repercussions of Iran’s return to Article VII.

Writer Dr. Omar Abdel Sattar Mahmoud