Regional disconnect

When he joined Israel to launch a war on Iran, Donald Trump revealed he does not comprehend Iran, the Arabs and the region as a whole as well as Israel. Trump does not know that for many Iranians this is a grudge match. In 1953 the US overthrew the last fully demo-cratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddegh who began the nationalisation of the oil industry. After Mosaddegh’s fall, the shah and the revolutionary government decided who could stand for election.

Trump has no experience of the blood and guts of war since he received five deferments from serving in the US military during the Vietnam war. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was in the Israeli army from 1967 to 1972, rose to captaincy, participated in operations, and was wounded in battle. He is pursuing his own objectives which do not necessarily coincide with or serve US interests. The involvement of Israel, seen by most Arabs as their chief enemy, makes it impossible for Arab governments to take part although Iran is considered threat to this volatile region.

Since Iran does not directly threaten the continental US, Trump has scrambled to justify this war. Although he dubbed the offensive “Epic Fury,” detractors dub it “Epic Folly.” When he launched the war on Feb.28, he called the war defensive action against Iranian aggression and a means to enable Iranians to liberate the country from a tyrannical regime. He vowed to eliminate Iran’s nuclear programme already “obliterated” last June by US and Israeli air strikes. He said he could take over the country in two or three days but, so far, a defiant Iran has lasted nearly three weeks.

US ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz focused on the nuclear issue by saying, “The United States has made every effort to negotiate a peaceful resolution of this conflict with Iran, but Iran has failed to take that opportunity” and launched a war of self-defence authorised by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Waltz chose to mislead. The US/Israel bombed Iranian nuclear sites to pre-empt negotiations which were achieving progress and it was reported that Tehran had agreed to “pause” uranium enrichment, a first step in achieving the US demand that Iran halt this activity.

The Pentagon revealed on March 1 that Iran had not planned to strike US forces or bases unless Israel attacked Iran. This admission negates the administration’s claim that Iran posed an “imminent threat” to the US. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth defined US objectives as destroying Iranian ballistic missiles and missile production capacity, the Iranian navy and other security facilities so Iran will never have nuclear weapons – which Iran has disavowed. Hegseth claimed falsely this is not a war for regime change, but the regime has already changed. While the US assassinated Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and high-ranking officials in his entourage, decapitation was followed by the succession of his son Mojtaba Khomeini, the choice of the hardline Republican Guard Corps, which is now in charge.

On March 6, Trump posted on social media: “There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER! After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before. IRAN WILL HAVE A GREAT FUTURE. MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN (MIGA!).” Later, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt clarified by saying that “unconditional surrender” meant that Trump would end the war when “Iran no longer poses a threat” to the US and “the [undefined] goal of Operation Epic Fury has been fully realised.” Whatever that means as Trump flip-flops on goals from morn to dusk.

While US and Israel contend Iran no longer has the weapons needed to threaten its neighbours, Tehran has closed the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 per cent of global oil is exported. The price of a barrel of oil has peaked at $1.20 before falling to $99.94-100. Iran’s chokehold on Hormuz is Tehran’s most potent weapon in the US-Israel war. Disruption drives up the oil price and impacts the livelihoods of billions of people around the world by raising the costs of fuel for home and office heating, for vehicles and manufacturers, for hospitals and clinics. 

History has shown regime change cannot be accomplished by air strikes alone. “People’s power” was successful in the Philippines in 1986, and domestic military forces have achieved regime change in a number of countries. External boots-on-the-ground were needed to effect regime change in Iraq in 2003. Libya’s 2011 regime change was achieved by NATO airpower and Libyan rebel ground forces supported by foreign special operations officers. However, regime change often results in chaos with surviving factions competing and fighting for power.

Opinion polls show that 77 per cent of US citizens oppose regime change wars and believe the US must be cautious in intervening in foreign countries affairs. Several commentators argue the US-Israeli war on Iran is a contemporary version of the October-November 1956 British-French-Israeli attack on Egypt aimed at ousting President Gamal Nasser after he nationalised the Suez Canal. US President Dwight Eisenhower called a halt to this war which coincided with the Russian invasion of Hungary. He had no choice. He could hardly support the first while condemning the second. The Suez debacle was seen at the time as the last gasp of traditional colonialism. This morphed into neo-colonialism which uses multiple means to achieve practitioners’ ends.

Photo: TNS