Iranian Rhetoric and Tragic Timelines

There is a need for getting past wishful thinking and to do real analysis. While most Arab states are openly buttressing Israel, Iran's actions at times effectively enable Israel's criminality.

Seyed Mohammad Marandi effectively argues in an interview with Glenn Greenwald that the Iranian government isn’t worse off with Syria having been overrun since now Syria is no longer a drain on Iran. This is the latest reason to highlight that Arabic countries — and most especially Palestine — are tremendously at the mercy of outside powers and the narrowest number of Arab elites. Arabs, especially Palestinians, end up as pawns.

Marandi claims that somehow Israel has “destroyed” itself. Certainly Israel is exposed in its criminality to more and more people, but it is literally getting away not with murder, but with genocide. To say that Israel is the one being damaged is to engage in a perverse sort of Israeli victimology. I examine Marandi’s claims in more detail below. I bear him absolutely no personal grudge, I rather like him and have occasionally retweeted him. I’m examining him rather than other analysts because I followed him more closely than others because he seemed intelligent.

Indeed, countless Israeli critics during the last year claimed Israel is set to collapse. Then Assad falls in Syria. As I have alluded, I think it’s possible that Israel could have fallen, for example if the “axis of resistance” acted in unison immediately after Oct. 7, 2023, but such an attack could have led to nuclear war and may not have had legal justification. As it was, the poorly timed mix of military attack and other actions precluded an Israeli collapse.

Instead of pursuing a strategy — such as Uniting for Peace and building on the South African use of the Genocide Convention — many people engage in wishful thinking and staked their hopes in a military savior. A clear-eyed view of some of the actions and rhetoric is overdue. Here, I examine some of the actions of Iran, which many thought would somehow come to the rescue of the Palestinians.

This reminds me of how some Palestinians viewed Saddam Hussein in 1991 when he lobbed some missiles at Israel.

Obviously Arab governments are doing the US establishment and Israel’s bidding, some openly, some tacitly. An attempt to scrutinize Iran should not be misinterpreted as a defense of these insidious regimes, I have challenged them to their faces for years.

The Iran axis with its illusionary promises and the pseudo-Turkish axis with its total phoniness feel like the Democratic and Republican parties to me.

Rhetoric from Iran can be like meaningless blather from Bernie Sanders about sticking it to the oligarchs without a plan, seemingly without any sense of self-awareness in the failure to deliver positive results regarding alleged goals.

April: Did Iranian Attack Actually Enable US Militarism?

On April 1, Israel attacked Iranian facility in Damascus.

On April 14, Iran attacked Israel with hundreds of drones.

That day, the State Dept. immediately put out a statement of the G7 foreign ministers condemning Iran. This was re-upped with they met in Italy on April 19 and condemned Iran.

On April 20, Congress passed a huge funding package, $26 billion to Israel.

I noted on May 6: “I really don’t think Iran thinks things through. To put it kindly. They launched their attack on Israel at a time that facilitated the US Congress passing more mega billions to Israel. It was also shortly before the G7 conference. So that ended up being about how bad Iran was instead of being how bad Israel was. Contrast this with how Hezbollah acted in 2006. Nasrallah had said it would take Israeli soldiers captive. He chose to do so exactly when Israel was attacking Gaza. So he was technically acting on behalf of Lebanon, but the timing facilitated the Palestinians. I’ve not seen that kind of super strategic thinking this time. It would have been something for Iran to launch that attack now, as Israel starts its escalation of Rafah. — File under interesting timing.”

Pete Lincoln commented: “Maybe Iran is controlled opposition. The West was behind bringing the Ayatollah to power. I am thinking many of these geopolitical conflicts are Fake Wrestling giving governments an excuse to fund the MIC and control populations.”

I’ve heard that — the notion that the US establishment wanted to bring the Ayatollah to power — before, including from secular Iranians. I don’t know if it’s true. What I do know is there’s been collusion between the US and Iranian establishment in extremely manipulative ways. And Iran’s stance, while outwardly — and with resources — supportive of the Palestinians has given the US/Israeli establishment the boogeyman it needs.

Autumn: The Devastating Response that Never Came

After the July assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Iran, it did not militarily retaliate or take other substantial action.

In August, Hezbollah targeted “Israel’s NSA” which conducts assassinations.

Sept. 17, Israel begins its pager attack on Lebanon.

On Sept. 27, Israel dramatically escalated its attacks on Lebanon and killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and hundreds of others.

On Oct. 1, Iran attacked Israel with hundreds of drones, killing one Palestinian and no Israelis. (The Jordanian government downed some of the Iranian projectiles, as it did in April.)

Several analysts claimed during this period that an Israeli attack on Iran would result in a devastating response by Iran.

Oct. 11: “Mohammad Marandi | Iran's Fierce Warning: A Devastating Response Awaits If Israel Strikes!”

Somewhat similarly, John Mearsheimer who so many accept as such a great geopolitical thinker, kept saying Iran has escalatory dominance.

Oct. 26, Israel “attacked military targets in Iran” — the AP reported — “retaliation for the barrage of ballistic missiles the Islamic Republic fired on Israel earlier this month. It was the first time Israel’s military has openly attacked Iran.”

Oct. 27, Marandi appeared on the BBC. He claimed: “the Islamic Republic of Iran will definitely retaliate against the genocidal Zionist regime.”

No substantial Iranian attack against Israel ever came. Or, to be exact, none has come yet.

Either Iran totally sold out (possible given history like October Surprise, as I recently wrote) or they are very mindful that a serious attack on Israel may be met with a nuclear response. What’s amazing is that Mearsheimer and others dismiss this, saying Israeli nukes are not useable. I recently raised the subject of Israel’s nuclear weapons arsenal with Scott Ritter and George Galloway, both of whom dismissed it.

By Dec. 8, long-time Iranian ally Assad left Damascus.

Meaningful progress is only going to come from the hard work, including clear-eye analysis, not pretending that rhetoric or performative acts are a substitute for what is needed.