The BBC had an interesting article yesterday. I was drawn between two settings. There is nothing wrong with the article. It is a point of view and anyone has that right. My setting was that the dimensionality is wrong. Some see Iran as a wimpy weasel, others as a weaselly wimp. I think they are both at the same time. That is as far as the difference is seen. The BBC in the shape of Jeremy Bowen hands us ‘Iran faces hard choices between risks of escalation or looking weak’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2742rynqgo). I don’t think they look weak, they are weak. When you have to rely on terrorists to bring your message across, you are weak. And the setting that this brings is that a stabilising effect that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia brought was torpedoed (for a lack of a better word) by Iran. Iran is so afraid to be the trivialising party in the middle east that they rely on three terrorist entities. Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthi forces.
We are given “They must decide on the least bad of a series of difficult choices. At one end of the spectrum is hitting back with another wave of ballistic missiles. Israel has already threatened to retaliate again if that happens” And the options of a bad series of choices is ‘encouraged’ by the west. Politico brought me this month the setting of loopholes that were created to enable other players to sell Russian oil, all legal (which is why we call it a loophole), yet this wasn’t created for Russia. Russia got to exploit the loophole the west made for Iran (my presumptuous thinking). Do you really think that Iran could have played the game this long if they didn’t have that loophole?
We are then given “Iran’s official media in the hours before and after Israel’s attacks carried defiant statements that, at face value, suggest the decision to respond had already been taken. Its language resembles Israel’s, citing its right to defend itself against attack. But the stakes are so high that Iran might decide to walk its threats back” which sounds nice on paper, but the reality is that this weasel was hiding behind three terrorist organisation. Hamas has now been bombed back into the stone age and their leaders are hiding in Doha, Qatar (according to some sources). As far as I see it, Gaza did this to themselves. Hezbollah decided to rely on pagers and the top of Hezbollah basically messaged themselves to death. That is number two down. The assault was so complete that pretty much the entire top of Hezbollah blew themselves up. Who ever didn’t do this will follow soon I reckon. Then there is just the Houthi brach left. I reckon that the next 3-5 years amounts to Iran calling that branch with requests for the good of Shia Islam. Not sure how they will bring that news, but it is likely to take on that form. All the money that Iran invested would now be asked to validate through actions. Hamas has seemingly lost around 50% of its fighting force and the rest is dubious of continuing and finding real solutions for their family. Hezbollah has no top, this means that Iran needs to put advisors on the ground, or lose whatever they had left. And the Houthi’s will go in a new direction. As I personally see it, with the recruitment of child soldiers they are taking on the direction Hamas had and as some drone technology that evolved in the Ukraine, we will see soon a new frontier develop where drones can be sent to a generic location and start auto targeting a scope of realistic issues. There is every consideration that whatever drone abilities the Saudi government has will soon gain serious teeth.
We are then given “Iran’s foreign ministry invoked its right to self defence “as enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter”. A statement said Iran believed it was both entitled and obligated to respond to foreign acts of aggression”, this sounds nice, but Iran played the terrorist card and has done so for years, which makes its statement baseless. We can see America ‘pleading’ with Israel not to hit the oil reserves and the loophole for oil makes it a desired move, but Israel has its own concerns. These terrorist actions are funded by Iran and defund their oil is a tactical move to temporary stop funding, making the tactic valid. As we see “The men in Tehran thought they had a better idea than all-out war. Instead, Iran used the allies and proxies in its so-called “axis of resistance” to attack Israel. The Houthis in Yemen blocked and destroyed shipping in the Red Sea. Hezbollah rocket fire from Lebanon forced at least 60,000 Israelis from their homes.” We are confronted with the harsh reality that Iran is considering extreme options and that is the final straw for Israel. They could bring to bare 125 missiles on Iranian oil fields and with that Iran will have no more options. A setting that was accelerated since 1979 comes to a stop when the oil becomes to tainted to be sold, it will be the oil that glows in the dark. And the world is fearing that moment. Too many stakeholders with their slice of pie that came from the oil loophole will end and there will be a lot of voices trying to delay this point. On the upside it would enable Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to set some solid work to make these two the solidifying hub of international cooperation on the Arabian peninsula.
The largest question for the world will be what will Iran decide and they could find a way to make hay out of that. Because any escalation will lead to the end of Iran, a path that started 6000 years ago. It is anyones guess if the Iran of today realises that they are out of survivable options. I see three paths and two remain silent because it amounts (without evidence) to fear mongering. And I am not inclined to openly support that view. The play nice card sounds nice, but it would require Iran to disband sections of the IRGC as well as stop supporting terrorism. Will Iran see that light? When people have been on that violent streak for decades, it is hard to stop. I get that, but does Iran have any resolution left? Empty threats will not bring home the veal as they say.
Well, it’s Monday now, so have a great new day.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 