During my brief stay in Venezuela, a client’s joint venture partner described politicians as people who stand in front of a mob and call it a parade. I initially thought I would use this phrase to describe the US’s efforts to portray US diplomacy as the fault of Iran’s (yet) failure to strike back at Israel for the assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, at least according to recent major media reports.
I will discuss the obvious absurdity of this assertion in more detail later, but it would be foolhardy for Iran to act prematurely, and acting now would be. Notably, Iran has coalition partners in the form of other members of the resistance axis, who have only worked loosely together up until now and have not always informed each other before making major moves, and Hamas in particular did not warn Iran about the October 7 attack. The US and NATO countries’ handling of Ukraine shows that this process is like herding cats; and NATO has existing organizations and perhaps decision-making structures (although, as Aurélien explains at length in a recent post, it is not well-suited for the kind of activities NATO wants to undertake).
The delay here is due to the Middle Eastern version Sleeping,1 The difficulty of reaching an agreement. The idea that the US, which not only fails to restrain Israel but also habitually invites the misbehaviour of the welfare state of Ukraine, can influence Iran is absurd. So all the Venezuelan cynicism can do is elaborate on it. The US is trying to get in front of the mob and call it a parade, but is too ignorant to realise that they are at the back and the mob is moving in the opposite direction.
So let’s use a familiar American image instead.
Oz is characterised by an intimidating setting, threat display and comprehensive information.
Today, Iranian (and Hezbollah and Hamas) threats of retaliation are barely news in the English-speaking media. Admittedly, Americans have shorter attention spans than a goldfish, and it may be a while before Iran acts, as it needs to get its allies on the same page, agree on tactics and targets, organize the associated logistics, and shore up its defenses. In line with that, Western media has largely ignored the fact that Iran has called an emergency meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Jeddah on Wednesday to get its allies on the same page. Significantly, Saudi Arabia Second condemnation of Haniya’s murder He also endorsed the official statement that “the illegal occupying power, Israel, bears full responsibility for this heinous attack.”
But the US is trying to convince everyone who pays attention that it has a major influence on Iran’s decision. This comes after repeated embarrassing examples of its inability to even get Israel to pretend to respect US entreaties. The assassination of Hamiyeh, who may have been Hamas’ chief negotiator, was a slap in the face to Biden and Blinken, who have relentlessly portrayed the illusion of a ceasefire as something that could ever come to fruition. In a strange sign of desperation, one of the latest peace plans, no different from the old one, was portrayed by a spokesman as an Israeli plan. Apart from being patently false, Israel’s blatant silence confirmed it. The administration quickly acknowledged that it was Biden’s plan.
Iran, and more so Hezbollah, are well aware of the potential economic and social costs of sparking a broader war, which is why their response has remained, clichéd, cautious: retaliation or modest escalation. It is therefore surprising, but sadly typical of the arrogance of the United States to act as if it has somehow educated Iran and its resistance axis members on this issue.
The Washington Post was the first to report on the new US party’s platform on Tuesday. Biden rushes to defuse time bombThis article was featured as an “opinion” because it was published in spy whisperer David Igantius’ column. Representative sections:
President Biden has … engaged in intense diplomacy and military preparations to avert a devastating war in the Middle East.
White House efforts have included secret talks with Iran to urge restraint, blunt warnings to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to disrupt a ceasefire in Gaza, and sending fleets of U.S. naval and air forces to defend Israel and other U.S. allies if deterrence fails.
Iran’s response has been complicated by confusion over the circumstances of Haniya’s death. Tehran initially claimed he was killed by an Israeli missile, and Iran called for a similar response. But officials said they had privately concluded he was killed by a hidden bomb, perhaps prompting a different response…
Tehran may also be deterred by this week’s US show of force and secret White House communications routed through the Swiss embassy in Tehran and the Iranian mission to the United Nations: “Iran is clear that the United States is unwavering in protecting our interests, our partners and our people. We have moved significant military assets to the region to underscore that principle,” a senior administration official wrote to me in a message.
The spin is pretty far-fetched: the claim that Haniyeh was killed by a bomb broke incredibly quickly, first via the New York Times, followed by an even more implausible version by the Telegraph (the latter of which is highly dubious given the number of sources it claims to have sourced from the Iranian government).
In contrast, Arab news reports quoted witnesses as saying the projectile hit the guest house, with reporter Alastair Cloake saying a colleague was in the same building when Haniya was killed. At 13:10Cloke said the impact had destroyed part of the side of the building and part of the roof, but it was clearly an external impact rather than a bomb.
The fact that U.S. intelligence sources can act with a straight face as if Iran is confused about what happened in its guesthouse, despite Iran’s perfect forensic capabilities, is an insult to Iran and the intelligence of its readers.
As Judge Napolitano emphasized earlier (see 17:15), many Islamic countries and countries of the Global South have concluded that “the West wants war.” For Iran, this means that further appeasement in the form of limited negotiated retaliation is no longer possible, because Western media consistently assess Iran as admitting weakness, which was confirmed the following day in the Washington Post:
As we and others have written at length, the Iranian attack was a huge success, and should have forced Israel to back down. In a textbook scenario, Iran would have attacked only pre-agreed military targets, hitting all targets with precision, and defeating Israeli defenses where they were best defended. Yet the media is perversely promoting the fact that Iran sent a wave of 300 very slow, cheap drones, all of which were destroyed, intended to attract and detail a US, Israeli, British and French attack, as a victory to divert attention from the damage that could be done by the more powerful missiles, as intended. Had any of the drones gone through, it would have been a sign of serious Western weakness, not Iranian strength.
Now, this article could simply suggest that U.S. officials are so delusional that they think their Middle Eastern counterparts will listen to them — which is entirely possible, given Blinken’s presence — or they could be doing their best to calm nerves after market indigestion earlier in the week.
But there are further signs that the US is all too eager to slow down the resistance axis. According to a new article in the Wall Street Journal: Biden, Egyptian, Qatari leaders urge more Gaza ceasefire talks next weekThe subheading should invite ridicule: “Both countries say they are open to making proposals to bridge differences between Israel and Hamas.”
After Israel assassinated Haniya, the current Minister of Finance, Ben Smotrich, Israel is justified in starving all of Gaza’s residents but is prevented from doing so by international pressure. Does the US have the nerve to act as if the ceasefire is anything other than an illusion? The Israeli government wants genocide, and its only purpose in a ceasefire would be to give the IDF a break to regroup and then do it all over again.
Attentive readers will notice that these three people sell vaporware.
In a joint statement released on Thursday, the two leaders called on Israel and Hamas to meet for negotiations on August 15. The United States has said Israel welcomes the request…
The official did not provide details of the proposal, which the three leaders said in a statement could resolve “remaining implementation issues in a manner that meets the expectations of all parties.”
The US appears to be pursuing further futile negotiations as a delaying tactic. Hamas is unlikely to be fooled and may take advantage of Russia’s stance that negotiations and military action will proceed on separate tracks. After all, what’s good for the goose is good for the siblings. Israel briefly suspended the war effort to allow for humanitarian relief.
None of this gives little (or any) weight to the real deterrent that Israel is using an Iran/Axis of Resistance attack as a pretext for launching tactical nukes. Israel used the death of a Druze child, collateral damage from Israeli air defense forces in a Hezbollah attack, something Israel never really cared about, as a pretext for assassinating Hezbollah leader Fuad Sukhkur. So Israel has already established that it will use any pretext as a pretext for escalation. The implication is that Israel may seriously attack if Iran does anything other than another puppet show response.
The US push for more pointless talks may also be intended to buy Israel and the US time to prepare, especially since US military assets across the Middle East are at risk. A missile attack on the Iranian government’s guest house would likely require US targeting assistance, making the US a co-belligerent.
Given the situation, Iran would have to act fast… if it could get all the moving parts in place, which is no easy task. But Lawrence Wilkerson argued that there are some axis of resistance strategies that wouldn’t be difficult to set up and could be very effective. He suggested firing 150 missiles every day. That level of sustained barrage would drive Israeli and US air defenses out of the theater in just a few months, but Iran and its friends could easily maintain that pace for a year.
Still, Israel would soon find itself defenseless. Would it then launch nuclear missiles? With Armageddon being Israel’s trump card, the only effective counter would be long range fires/target suppression and perhaps a devastating first strike. Russia has already sent Iran very powerful electronic warfare equipment.
Have Russia and Iran also tested electromagnetic pulse bombs so they could be deployed in practice?
In other words, Iran is the opposite of reckless. The stakes are high, and existential. But it also knows that submitting to a docile Western policy of retaliation would be foolish. How Iran will resolve this contradiction is beyond my ability. The balance of factors suggests that Iran will act as soon as possible, but that may still be some time away.
_____
1 My Japanese colleague translated it as “stroking the roots,” meaning making sure that the newly planted tree is in properly prepared soil. Contrary to the Western image of the Japanese, the process was not at all pleasant. However, complaints and concerns were expressed and solutions and negotiations were carried out.
