29.08.2024
Not two equals
Despite the reactionary nature of the Iranian dictatorship, there can be no drawing of an equivalence with Israel. Netanyahu’s government is doing its utmost to turn the West Bank into another Gaza and drag the whole region into war, says Yassamine Mather
There seems to be no end to Israel’s aggression in the region: as the US and its allies stand by and continue to support the Zionist state via diplomatic protection and military aid, it perseveres in its attempts to engulf the entire region in new wars.
First it tried to provoke an attack by Iran’s Islamic Republic with the assassination of Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh in Tehran in early August a day after the murder of Hezbollah military leader, Fuad Shukr, in Lebanon. As these acts of terror failed to bring Iran into full confrontation with Israel, it went for a further escalation by what Netanyahu has called “a series of pre-emptive strikes across southern Lebanon to prevent a significant rocket and drone attack by Hezbollah”. On August 25 and 26, Israeli jets attacked thousands of rocket launchers belonging to the Lebanese militant group. Hezbollah and its allies confirmed that three of their fighters were killed, but denied the extent of the damage to their arsenal.
Despite the strikes, Hezbollah claimed it had launched 320 rockets and drones at Israel in retaliation for the assassination of its senior commander. Israel’s military reported that one Israeli navy soldier was killed in the exchange. The Biden administration keeps telling us it is trying to prevent further escalation after 10 months of hostilities that have heightened concerns of a broader conflict between Lebanon and Israel. However clearly the west’s principal ally in the region is very serious about provoking an all-out war with Lebanon and Iran - for good reasons.
Top of the list, it needs to divert attention from the genocide in Gaza, where over 40,000 civilians are known to have lost their live since October 2023, while the onset of diseases including polio is threatening thousands of lives - not only in Gaza, but in the entire region. All the bravado about a ceasefire is just a cruel illusion designed to divert attention from the reality of Gaza and the latest round of attacks on Jenin, Tulkarm, Nablus, Tubas and other parts of the West Bank.
Predictably, the US-sponsored peace talks in Cairo ended without a breakthrough last weekend. Hamas accused Israel of reneging on prior agreements and rejected new Israeli conditions, though Israel denies altering its stance since the last negotiations in early July.
As well as destroying short-range rockets, Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that during Sunday’s strike on southern Lebanon, the Israeli Defence Forces intercepted all of the drones which Hezbollah had “launched at a strategic target in the centre of the country”. He warned: “Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut and Khamenei in Tehran need to know that this is an additional step in changing the situation in the north.”
Foreign minister Israel Katz said he had told dozens of his counterparts worldwide that Israel did “not seek a full-scale war”, but would “do whatever it takes to protect our citizens”. Responding to this, Nasrallah stated: “We identified the Glilot base as a primary target for our operation. It houses Unit 8200, responsible for eavesdropping and espionage activities, and is located 110 kilometres from the Lebanese border and only 1,500 metres from Tel Aviv.”
Ideological drive
According to Gideon Levy, writing in Haaretz on August 25, “It’s ideology that drives Netanyahu, not just power.” Levy adds: “Netanyahu never believed in agreements with the Palestinians. He is a devout believer in living by the sword forever; he has never retreated from it.”
For Israel the main aim remains drawing Iran into a conflict that will initiate US direct intervention in defending the Zionist state. But the question remains, why doesn’t Israel attack Iran directly? The cold war between the two countries has gone on for many years, but so far Israel has avoided bombing Iranian military sites or attacking Iran’s Revolutionary Guards. One answer is provided by an Israeli general who admitted that on its own Israel has not got the military means for such an attack. Hence the absolute need to drag the US and it allies into any conflict with Iran. Meanwhile, at least for the time being, attacking Lebanon and turning the West Bank into another Gaza remains the best option.
Since October 7 there have been near-daily exchanges of fire across the Israel-Lebanon border. Hezbollah at times claims that its actions are in support of Hamas, but most of the skirmishes have been in direct retaliation for Israeli attacks, while inside Lebanon Hezbollah presents these operations as ‘defending the territorial integrity of the country’.
During the same period Lebanon’s health ministry has reported over 560 deaths. Some are no doubt Hezbollah fighters, but, as in all military operations, we must not underestimate the collateral damage. Meanwhile, in Israel the authorities report that 26 civilians and 23 soldiers have been killed, while, according to the UN, nearly 200,000 people have been displaced on both sides of the border between Israel and Lebanon.
In addition to the Israeli “pre-emptive” strikes, we should not forget the recent deployment of US warships to the region. Three weeks ago the US sent an aircraft carrier, warships and a fighter squadron to the Middle East, claiming these were necessary, as the region braces for “Iranian retaliation”. And this week we heard from the US secretary of state for defence that the global hegemon was to send more combat aircraft and warships to the region.
There is no doubt that Iran’s Islamic Republic is a reactionary, authoritarian state. Renewed persecution of political prisoners and women who refuse to adhere to legislation regarding the wearing of the hijab in public are actions of a tin-pot dictatorship.
But that does not justify siding with the Israeli state! Israel engages repeatedly in acts of terror, including the assassination of opponents in other countries, and, of course, it is engaged in genocide in Gaza. Yet no western government has condemned its actions. On the contrary they all send arms to enable these criminal actions.
We then have the mainstream media repeating ad infinitum that the Houthis are pro-Iran rebels, despite having been effectively in power in Yemen since 2015. True, the Houthis and Iran have common enemies, but the Houthis are an independent force with their own aims and ambitions. Meanwhile, Hezbollah - a major component of the Lebanese government and an integral part of Lebanese capitalism - is referred to as a ‘pro-Iranian terror group’, while the reality is that, far from being the obedient servant of Iran, it acts first and foremost in its own political and economic interests.
Yet none of this seems to matter for sections of the Iranian left. A recent leaflet by the Communist Party of Iran and Rahe Kargar equating Israeli and Iranian ‘terrorism’ is just nonsense.1 Israel is not just a terrorist state: it is the military attack-dog for US imperialism in the region, while Iran makes do with largely ineffective drones and missiles and antiquated tanks, artillery and combat aircraft. These left groups then wonder why sections of Iran’s deluded youth support pro-shah propaganda put out by Israeli-financed TV stations. Such propaganda promotes not just the shah’s son, but torturers such as Parviz Sabeti, former head of Savak, the shah’s notorious security service. This last case enraged our ex-leftists, because Sabeti was involved in the imprisonment and subsequent torture of some of them, before the fall of the shah. But if the ‘left’ is going to be apologists for imperialism and its regional attack-dog, why should young people believe anything it says about the shah’s era?
To me it looks like these groups live in a parallel universe to everyone else I know on the international left. Professor Hamid Dabashi, writing for the website Middle East Eye, uses the correct title: “How genocide in Gaza marked the death of Iran’s expat opposition”. He is also right to include sections of the exiled left in his criticisms.2
Of course, the Iranian left must remain steadfast in fighting for the overthrow of the current regime. But this must never mean being soft on imperialism, not to mention its main political and military ally in the region: the settler-colonial state of Israel.
Nuclear deal
Meanwhile, in Iran itself, the new ‘reformist’ government has no choice but try to negotiate a revised agreement with the west, aiming to have sanctions lifted, or at least reduced, in return for restrictions on its nuclear programme. Despite the alleviation of some sanctions - the result of the ‘secret’ negotiations with the Biden administration - the economy is in a terrible state. However, there is uncertainty about the future of the 2015 nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
According to a political source inside Iran, the JCPOA is “not good enough for us any more”.3 It suggests that the Iranian government is looking to end the nuclear crisis by going beyond the existing framework. The previous conservative administration under Ebrahim Raisi (2021-24) was unable to revive the nuclear deal during two years of indirect negotiations, instead opting for limited, transactional arrangements with the US.
The JCPOA was the outcome of two years of intensive face-to-face negotiations between Iran and the US. However, after the Trump administration’s unilateral withdrawal in 2018, Tehran has avoided direct talks with Washington. When asked if new president Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration is willing to reverse course and engage directly, the high-ranking Iranian source indicated a preference for continuing indirect negotiations with the US. Despite this claim there are many reports of secret direct talks between Iran and the US over the last few months and it is no big secret that Iran’s supreme leader has decided that the survival of the regime requires the lifting of some sanctions, even if the price to pay might be a little humiliating.
That is why he permitted the election of a ‘reformist’ president and supported the approval of his cabinet. For the first time in over two decades, all 19 ministerial nominees presented by an incoming Iranian president were approved by parliament, which is dominated by conservatives. Notably they include foreign minister Abbas Araqchi, a former senior nuclear negotiator, known for his rapport with his US counterparts.
In the week since taking office, Araqchi has outlined his views on the future of nuclear diplomacy and, according to ministry officials, he has engaged in discussions with Arab and European leaders. Shortly after his confirmation, Araqchi spoke with EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, whose deputy, Enrique Mora, has facilitated engagement with Iran for years. Mora’s attendance at Pezeshkian’s July 31 inauguration - despite being the only senior European official present - signals the EU’s stance towards proposed nuclear negotiations.
Speaking on state television last week, Araqchi stated that regional and international conditions have significantly changed in recent years, citing the wars in Gaza and Ukraine, as well as the US presidential elections, as complicating factors. He also argued that the JCPOA’s sunset clauses have expired, necessitating new negotiations: “This document needs to be reopened, and some parts need to be changed. This is not an easy task,”
He was trying to explain that, while the 2021 indirect negotiations with the Biden administration focused on reviving the JCPOA, restoring the accord in its current form is no longer feasible.