(archive link)
I have excerpted some of the most interesting parts, to read the full article which is worthwhile please follow the link.
As allies continue to pressure Tehran, the Islamic Republic is wondering who will benefit from a possible war in the region
By Farhad Ibragimov – expert, lecturer at the Faculty of Economics of RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
The assassination of Ismail Haniyeh [Hamas leadership and chief negotiator] in Tehran at the end of July has dramatically escalated the tension between Iran and Israel, which have been on the brink of a full-scale war for several decades.
In 2024, Iran faced a series of major challenges: a large terrorist attack in Kerman at the grave of General Qasem Soleimani; an attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus which killed 11 diplomats and two high-ranking Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) generals; the tragic deaths of President Ibrahim Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian in a helicopter crash; and finally, the assassination of the leader of the radical Hamas movement Ismail Haniyeh in the center of Tehran.
All of this forces Iran’s political leadership to take tougher and more radical measures in order to prove both to its own people and to the world that this is not the way to “talk” with Iran.
Apparently Iran is delaying taking any action and frustration is growing with its allies such as Hezbollah and other militias.
On the one hand, by its ominous silence, Iran has forced Israel to resort to extreme security measures and close its airspace. Tehran believes that the expectation of a response is also part of the punishment, because tension in Israel continues to rise.
On the other hand, the White House has reassured itself, insisting that through intermediaries, it has convinced Tehran to abandon the idea of attacking Israel. In its usual manner full of pathos, the Biden administration has declared that Iran would face serious consequences if it decided to strike Israel. In fact, Washington does not benefit from the escalation of the conflict – in light of the upcoming US elections, it does not want to give Donald Trump a chance to accuse the Democrats of having failed to prevent an attack on their main ally in the region. Therefore, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan are ready to negotiate with anyone, even Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in order to prevent a scenario that would be unfavorable for them.
But as we know this won't bring an end to the genocide in Gaza, the peace talks are a smoke-screen and short of the US somehow using leverage on isn'treali intelligence to force them to coup Netanyahu there will be no peace this year that involves good terms that Hamas finds acceptable and which give any breathing room to the Palestinian people.
A few days ago, the Kuwaiti edition of Al-Jarida reported that Iran’s relations with its allies have deteriorated because of Israel. The media notes that Tehran has provoked the anger of Hezbollah by saying that it’s necessary to be patient about avenging Israel for the murders of Ismail Haniyeh and Fuad Shukr – one of the senior military officials of Hezbollah. At a meeting of the representatives of pro-Iranian forces in Tehran, representatives of the IRGC demanded their allies demonstrate restraint regarding Israel – at least while negotiations on a ceasefire in Gaza are ongoing.
The disagreement turned into an argument, and some delegates allegedly left the meeting quite angry. The meeting was attended by representatives of Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Yemen’s Houthis (the Ansar Allah movement), and some smaller Iraqi groups.
Hezbollah believes that the only way to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza and peace in the entire region is to use force against Israel. They believe it is time to open all fronts, directly attack Israel and confront anyone who decides to defend it, including US troops and the Arab countries. Tehran’s allies speak in favor of large-scale and long-term military operations aimed at destroying Israeli infrastructure, security systems, military and economic facilities, as well as Israel’s civilian and residential areas. In their opinion, this will force Israelis to live in shelters for a long time, and they will experience the same challenges as the residents of Gaza.
Moreover, representatives of Hezbollah stated that the current situation cannot be ignored, and that they can independently decide to attack Israel without coordinating their actions with Iran. Hezbollah also said that after the Israeli attack on the southern suburbs of Beirut, it should attack Haifa and Tel Aviv. Moreover, Hezbollah is considering expanding the goals of its possible military operation and attacking other Israeli cities, even if this leads to casualties among civilians. Yemen’s Houthis supported Hezbollah’s position.
A source in the IRGC said that the Iranian side made it clear that such a scenario is quite risky and will only serve the interests of Israel.
He noted that the Iranians offered to negotiate with Israel on the principle of “an eye for an eye” – i.e., if one of the leaders of the Axis of Resistance is killed, an Israeli official must be killed in return. To this, Hamas representatives who were at the meeting in Tehran allegedly replied, “If Iran is ready to accept the consequences of the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in exchange for the murder of Haniyeh, then Hamas will support this policy, but if Iran’s goal is to kill lower-level figures, the movement will not agree with this.”
What does everyone think?
Should Iran continue avoiding escalation that may draw in the US?
Is this foolish and likely to embolden Netanyahu who after all is desperately trying to escalate in order to extend his own rule at home and avoid an election or consequences for his failure to get the hostages back that has made him unpopular even within the settler-colonial occupation?
Can a death blow be delivered to the occupation without Iran and other nations suffering serious devastation from US retaliation?
Liberal capitalists are not necessarily that smart. And Russia is not run by principled Marxists.
It's one of those things I worry about a bit. I worry a lot more about the west convincing India to get into a hot war with China that turns nuclear while they sit on the sidelines eating popcorn and waiting to swoop in and take control of the remainder populations of both to exploit.
Do I think Russia will trust the west in the way it did post USSR dissolution in the 90s, 2000s, even 2010s in the near future? No. Does that mean that they can't be bought or rented? Also no.
They wouldn't do anything on credit or on the basis of promises like they have done in the past but if the west gave them concrete things and benefits in hand (instead of stringing them along) I think there are enough of the ruling class in Russia who are mercenary enough that they could be obliged to at the very least turn the other way and clasp their hands together withholding any help while the west knifes China, stopping shipments, ignoring western missiles passing over their airspace, that kind of stuff. I don't think the west can recruit them to pour their armies across the Chinese border to fight with the west but they could be bribed to backstab them possibly, especially if they think they can do so with plausible deniability. So things like selling military secrets they learned from defense cooperation, making certain moves with natural resources that are unfriendly and timed to hurt China, selling the west weapons tech or weapons manufacturing, things like that.
Basically Russia is still very much a fair-weather friend to China even with all that has happened.
The problem with humans is we live such short lives. Lessons are learned and die with the ones who learn them, the next generation being fooled by the same lies their fathers or grandfathers were, this holds as true for world leaders outside the US hegemon led order as it does for workers in the imperial core who are fooled time and again, each generation in the same types of ways. So once Putin is out of power and dies, maybe those who didn't take these lessons to heart gain power, maybe just very mercenary factions of the Russian bourgeoisie and their political class gain power. (I sometimes think if humans lived natural lives to the average age of 150 and stayed able to do work and had functioning faculties regularly into their 120th year that the revolution would have swept the globe decades ago)
Part of this is Russia refuses to shut the door on the west. They don't unleash full propaganda on their people about how awful the west is because they're still being strung along by whispered promises and winks from Macron and other Euro leaders that there is this idea that the Ukraine conflict will wind down in a year or so and then the EU will come back to Russia for gas and trade and they can have their cake and eat it too and beat the US. And there is some truth that there are independent minded Europeans who'd like to get back together with Russia to check US influence but they're not actually in power, they're on a leash and the US can tug it much harder yet to reign in them and their aspirations for Europe escaping the grasp of the US.
The biggest thing going for us and China is the fact the US is so arrogant and used to unipolarity that I'm just not sure they can make a convincing gesture to the Russian ruling class that convinces them in the next 10 years when it might matter.