This is a free preview of the episode "Iran Pt. 4: Towards a Multipolar World / Matteo Capasso." You can listen to the full episode by subscribing to our Patreon here: https://www.patreon.com/upstreampodcast As a Patreon subscriber you'll get access to at least one bonus episode a month (usually two or three), our entire back catalog of Patreon episodes, early access to certain episodes, and other benefits like stickers and bumper stickers—depending on which tier you subscribe to. access to bi-weekly bonus episodes ranging from conversations to readings and more. Signing up for Patreon is a great way to make Upstream a weekly show, and it will also give you access to our entire back catalog of Patreon episodes along with stickers and bumper stickers at certain subscription tiers. You'll also be helping to keep Upstream sustainable and allowing us to keep this project going. In Part 4 of our ongoing series on Iran, Matteo Capasso joins us to discuss the global implications of the war on Iran. Matteo Capasso is professor of Middle East Studies based in China and the editor of Middle East Critique, a peer-reviewed Middle Eastern studies journal published by Taylor & Francis. Our conversation begins with a brief overview of the so-called ceasefire agreement, taking a zoomed out look instead of focusing on the details. Matteo then explains why this war is not just existential for the Islamic Republic of Iran, but for the United States and Israel as well, examining the war's implications on both the internal contradictions of the United States as well as the financial architecture of the unipolar world system. We bring back the lens and explore not just the regional implications of the war in terms of the Gulf states but also with Europe and, significantly, with China, which, when you zoom out far enough, plays a significant role in the United States' decision to go to war with Iran, as outlined in the United States' National Security Strategy document published in 2025. We then bring in Israel and the Great Israel project, tying it into our analysis and explaining how Palestine is emblematic of the contradictions that have led the United States and its imperial project into deep crisis. Matteo draws a line from the invasion of Iraq in 2003 to the overthrow of Libra, Syria, and the assaults on Lebanon and of course Palestine and explains how all of these assaults are part of a larger project and military strategy by the United States and its proxy force in the region—Israel. In closing, we take a closer look at China, comparing and contrasting China and Iran's models of sovereign development and exploring their current relationship with a dialectical and historical materialist analysis. We conclude with a look at the competing visions of a world order that can be contrasted between the United States and Israel—a vision based on genocide and the accumulation of waste—and the diverse visions embodied by states such as Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, or China, which present a path forward that looks much different from the death and destruction offered by the United States. Further resources: Middle East Critique National Security Strategy of the United States of America, Nov 2025 Related episodes: Listen to our ongoing series on Iran Palestine Pt. 13: Al-Aqsa Flood and the Resistance Axis w/ Matteo Capasso Listen to our ongoing series on China Listen to our ongoing series on Palestine Listen to our ongoing series on Lebanon Listen to our ongoing series on Cuba Listen to our ongoing series on Venezuela Listen to our ongoing series on the Alliance of Sahel States Upstream is a labor of love—we couldn't keep this project going without the generosity of our listeners and fans. Subscribe to our Patreon at patreon.com/upstreampodcast or please consider chipping in a one-time or recurring donation at www.upstreampodcast.org/support For more from Upstream, visit www.upstreampodcast.org and follow us on Instagram and Bluesky. You can also subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to your favorite podcasts.

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.