There is a larger setting in the world (predominantly the middle east). We are given by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3yqzx72zno) ‘Iran’s supreme leader says enemies will receive ‘crushing response’’. I left it to the left at first (three days ago) for the reason that the entire Iran debacle is like hauling water to the sea. Where the text starts with “The US and Israel “will definitely receive a crushing response”, Iran’s supreme leader has said, following an Israeli attack on Iran a week ago.” It sounds nice, but Iran is limited to deliver attacks through terrorist fractions. It is too scared to attack directly. In the beginning it was about deniability, but that is gone now and Iran is on the verge of be labelled “a terrorist nation” by pretty much all nations. And it is scared of that as such it is trying to kiss up to Antonio Guterres. Yet Israel decided on October 13th “Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz reinforced on Sunday his decision to declare U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres persona non grata over what he described as a failure to condemn Iran’s missile attack and antisemitic and anti-Israel conduct.” There are other nations thinking that Guterres has outlived its usefulness as a UN tool (I speculate that Ukraine is one of them). So when we see the BBC give us “The threat comes as Iran assesses whether and how to respond to Israel’s attack last month, that Iran said killed four soldiers, which was in retaliation for an Iranian missile attack against Israel earlier in October.” There is only so much Iran can get away with and whilst the US is begging to leave the oil fields alone (they get a slice of that revenue I reckon). Iran is now losing whatever options they had. As I see it Robert F. Worth said it best “‘The Iranian Period Is Finished’. Hezbollah’s losses have led some in Lebanon to imagine a future without it.” You see Hamas might seen shelter behind civilian bodies there, but Hezbollah is merely a small part of the 5.5 million population and Israel has had enough.
Now that U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has been called a persona non grata, the options for the UN will diminish a lot more and Hezbollah has none left. Their only option is for Iran to engage in a full scale war and Iran is hesitant to do so. With the attacks on Saudi Arabia (via Houthi proxy) they only stand the smallest of chances if other Arabian nations support them and those nations are not willing to do that (as I personally see it). And the issue continues (and worsens). The BBC also reported “Iran’s so-called “axis of resistance” is an alliance of Tehran-backed groups that include Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and well-armed groups in Iraq and Syria. Most have been designated as terrorist entities by some Western states.” Let me be clear, they merely voiced the words of Iran and there is the problem. Do you think that the BBC would have given Germany the ‘respect’ by calling it the third kingdom? (1933 – 1945) And the larger option becomes that ‘their’ axis of resistance is in shambles. The Hamas terrorists are hiding behind the population they claim to protect. Hezbollah terrorists are relying on exploding pagers and the rest of Hezbollah has no clue what to do and Houthi terrorists are in a dangerous position. Lloyds reported yesterday “Houthis’ reported to be earning an estimated $180m a month from illegal safe-transit fees paid by unnamed shipping agents to secure safe passage through the Red Sea” as well as a report from ynet news that ‘Houthis turn to social media to raise funds for war’, this tells me that they are now cash strapped and here the UN is close to useless. They might talk a nice talk but it seems to be finally falling on deaf ears. In the meantime a report a mere 15 hours ago gives us that Houthi forces are trying to align themselves with Al-Qaeda forces. This happened whilst one source gives us “the two terrorist groups agreed to put aside their differences and focus on weakening the Yemeni government” the beginning of all kinds of escalations. And that is the setting for Iran, or as the American voices state “Become Al-Qaeda’s bitch or fall alone”, I cannot vouch for that, but Iran depended on deniability and now that this is gone Iran faces the reality of going to war. So how long until that goes wrong? In all these settings the United Nations might be out of options as well (until a new CEO is elected). You see on October 24th we got to hear “UN Secretary-General António Guterres reiterated in a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday that his country’s on-going invasion of Ukraine violates the United Nations Charter and international law.” ‘Reiterated’? This has been going on for 10 years and now we see ‘reiterated’? I reckon that the insertion of North Korean troops is making this a larger stage. Basically it is now a world war. You see, there is no real definition, one that aligns with todays setting of “In order to qualify as a world war, at least one of three criteria must be met: the conflict takes place between multiple nations across the globe, battles are fought in many different locations, and the war must be fought against great powers with significantly advanced technology.” It now involves Russia, Ukraine and North Korea. At this point I believe that the setting of a World War is reached. You see one criteria was met and this reflects back unto Iran too. Because in this setting, Iran might be getting cozy with Russia, but Russia has its own brand of troubles and that is setting the grind in another direction. As such Iran loses whatever friends they thought they had. As such we are given “Saudi Arabia, Jordan and United Arab Emirates unite against Iran, with support from the United States.” A statement that is presumptuous, but lacks clear evidence (as I see it). It is likely to be true, but I have not seen that evidence. And in this setting Iran has two options, the first is to engage is all out war, the other is to drop the terrorist organisations Hezbollah and Houthi, leaving them to fend for themselves.
I could be wrong but this is as I see it the political chessboard where we have three players. I would personally see a different stage where the board is used with the chess pieces of Chinese chess. It would be a decent challenge to get any player to actually win whilst the other two are hacking on the pieces and that applies to all sides in this equation. If we get a ‘dopey to dollars’ equation I reckon that Israel has a lead because Iran is about to lose two thirds of its ‘axis’ and that results in less pieces to move around and more exposure of its own pieces. And the number one weakness for Iran is that they cannot move their oil fields or oil infrastructure. That is the bottleneck for Iran, and they have less and less options for securing that financial option.
As I personally see it Iran is about to become ‘I ran’ and they now have no place to run to.
Have a great day.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 