This article is about Dars Haaye yak Dargiri Khoonin – about self-examination on the part of Iran about how their conduct has been flawed since their Islamic revolution 57 years ago and what lessons they can draw from the 40-day bloody, destructive war they have bravely gone through. The proud, educated and cultured people of Iran deserve peace where they can realize their immense potential as dignified inheritors of an enlightened civilization to become a technology-intensive nation to lead a prosperous life.
To begin with, there is no doubt that in defying US diplomatically and having survived the onslaught of a vastly superior war machine of US and Israel, Iran has secured a strategic victory. Though they sustained immense damages, as listed below, many of their missiles remain untouched, their drones intact and their state organs stable. By choking the Aabna-e-Hormuz, the entry and exit point of Khaleej Faris is firmly under their control. After forty days of war, US president, as unstable, egoistic and narcissist as he may be, appeared frustrated on the unexpected resistance displayed by Iran.
The US plan for a regime change and control over Iranian petroleum industry has been defeated, and its standing as an invincible lone superpower of the world stands severely dented. In this scenario, a peace deal or Islamabad Accord, if finalized, will be construed as US surrender, elevating Iranian status.
However, despite acknowledging their steadfastness in the face of their trial by fire, it is hoped that Iranian leadership will conduct a self-analysis of the reasons that led them to war; a war that they should have avoided at all costs. This article is an attempt at taking stock of persistent Iranian strategic mistakes and miscalculations accumulated over half a century that ultimately led to a costly conflict.
The foremost issue with the Iranian political system is that it is not an inclusive government. Iran’s clergy, and not her people, has suffocating control of all organs of state machinery. They don’t like the word ‘regime’ applied to their rule, but what else can a closed system be called? Liberalism is a much-maligned word in theocracy-dominated states, Pakistan included, However, the term does not imply a culturally Westernized society, as is mistakenly assumed by our clergy, rather it indicates a nation which is inclusive and capable of accommodating different point of views and lifestyle choices. When a government comes to power, through elections or otherwise, it is supported by some and detested by others but it represents all segments of society and must act accordingly.
The key to developing a nuclear device is to install an airtight security perimeter and proceed discreetly: never claim your right to have nuclear weapons until you already possess them
Iran knows that Ayatollah Khomeini lived freely in France for a number of years; a nation where his extreme religious views found no traction. It was possible only because French society is inclusive and its government completely secular that tolerates divergent religious views as a natural right.
Iran has failed to be inclusive. Women’s rights and status have been severely curtailed. The hijab issue has been blown out of proportion as if the whole Islamic government is threatened by a girl appearing without a head scarf. This is preposterous behaviour. It has divided society and brought tyranny on people. While this issue is being mentioned, it defies logic that Muslim clergy everywhere, whether in Sunni Saudi Arabia and Pakistan or Shia Iran, has been misogynist when it comes to granting economic, cultural and legal rights to women, something which is deplorable, to say the least.
Ever since the culmination of Iranian Revolution in February 1979 and replacement of repressive Pahlavi regime with equally repressive Ayatollahs, official Tehran policy has been of a non-flexible hardline attitude towards the west; especially towards the US who was labelled as the Great Satan and branded with slogans of death to them. While these slogans and labels do not sound ominous in the Persian and Urdu languages, they convey hatred towards a whole nation and a very powerful nation at that. Humiliation of US diplomats in Iran and holding them as hostages was another ill-advised policy. Among the many anomalies of imposition of Islamic rule in Iran, one of the most troubling has been the bloody purges of liberals and leftists who formed the vanguard of the revolution. This has frozen the revolution firmly in an extreme theological position, pitching the state against the world.
The Egyptian Tahrir Revolution of 2011, too, failed because the Muslim Brotherhood repressed the liberals who, though not as organized, had been the leading faction demanding freedom against Hosni Mubarak dictatorship. Having come to power, the Brotherhood stifled individual freedoms just as the Mubarak regime had been doing, paving way for return of military rule. If Iran has to find an honourable place in the comity of the nations, it will have to pursue a moderate internal as well as external policy. Perpetual misuse of power at home and continuous warfare abroad is not in their interest.
As for the current war unleashed by US and Israel, it is an Iranian diplomatic failure for the war to have started. If – as Clausewitz wrote in his book titled On War – it is the case that war is continuation of policy by other means, then it also implies that the Iranian policy followed so far has been a failure to allow Israel and US to continue their belligerent policy through force. Iran has suffered a lot of devastation in this conflict. Industries, petrochemical plants, pharmaceutical factories, refineries, gas fields, road-rail bridges, railway stations, hundreds of schools, scores of medical facilities, a number of universities, research institutes, housing units, nuclear facilities, ports, airfields, and several more economic units have been decimated. Their navy, air force and IRGC command centres are completely out of action. Though civilian casualties have been under five thousand, IRGC losses are several times higher. Iran’s top several layers of political and military leadership have been eliminated.
That is a terrible price to pay. Iran’s diplomatic efforts should have been aimed at a fine balance between defiance and avoidance of war. Israel has long wanted to attack Iran and its success in doing so along with US is Iranian policy failure.
However, Iran is not defeated. Clausewitz also wrote in the same book, “If we desire to defeat the enemy, we must proportion our efforts to his powers of resistance.” It is then clear by the stalemate in this conflict that the US either underestimated Iranian resistance or simply lacks the effort to overcome this resistance. That is no different from their unfortunate forays in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Yet, if Iran is claiming a victory, it is Pyrrhic in nature. Iran was the last to stand in the ring but it has taken terrible body blows, is severely wounded and would take long to recover.
Iran’s strategic overreach is evident. Support of Hezbollah, Hamas, Ansar Allah (Houthis), Bashar Al-Assad and several Shia groups in Iraq extended Iran beyond its capacity. History shows, as well presented by Paul Kennedy in his monumental work The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, strategic overreach has been the primary cause of fall of great powers. Iran is, at best, not even a middle level power. Its indulgence in foreign forays, no matter how worthy the cause, have been expensive. Every nation must stay within its resources and Iran is no exception to this rule.
Finally, for this piece, Iran followed a wrong path for her nuclear ambitions. Israel developed a nuclear device discreetly, as did Soviet Union, China, India, North Korea, South Africa and Pakistan. They neither declared their intentions, nor their resolve, for achieving this objective. They also kept a tight lid on its security. While Iranians were enriching their Uranium beyond 20%, their security was weak and the whole world knew about it. This allowed Israel to eliminate Iranian nuclear scientists, and sabotage their project facilities.
There is no denying the fact that Iran needs a few nuclear devices for her survival but it must hold her ambitions in this field for now, to buy peace and wait till it is not suspected of developing one. Egypt, Türkiye and Saudi Arabia must have learnt the same lesson by the current crisis. Broadly speaking, the key to developing a nuclear device is to first install an airtight security parameter and then go through the steps discreetly; if questioned, deny its existence in a feeble tone. Never claim your right to have nuclear weapons till you have them.
Apparently, Israel was not meaningfully consulted on the ceasefire and was left out of the negotiating process. It must be feeling relegated to the position of an underling, though it has been behaving as leading the US in Middle East policy matters.
Israel is a rogue state and ever since the ceasefire, has been acting as one by conducting brutal attacks on Lebanon; certainly, as an attempt to derail the peace process. Israel’s survival lies in perpetual warfare. Peace means that it is just another Middle East state; which would be its undoing. Conflict strengthens its raison d’etre, which is greater Israel, denial of two-state solution and eviction of Palestinians from Gaza and West Bank. It, therefore, will play a spoiler and undercut efforts to end the current conflict.
Though the Islamabad Talks have been inconclusive, yet the meetings themselves have been a positive step and there is still time left before the agreed ceasefire period expires. It is hoped that peace prevails for Iran. Their people need and deserve it. With sanctions lifted, she will progress rapidly.
Iran has trained, educated manpower and will quickly rebuild the institutions and infrastructure destroyed in these 40 days. However, Iran needs to straighten out the anomalies in the country’s own socio-political systems.