Since the 1980s, I have harbored apprehensions about the Iranian regime. At first, I felt pleased, perhaps for a few hours, after its success in overthrowing the Shah’s tyrannical regime, the “policeman of the Gulf,” and after the promise by the leader of the revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, that he would soon return to his beloved city of Qom after completing certain tasks.
However, as soon as he announced his intention to transform Iran into an Islamic Republic and expressed surprise at the apprehension some felt regarding his call, completely ignoring the dangerous contradiction inherent in the term, my joy vanished and was replaced by suspicion.
I later expressed this sentiment in dozens of articles, one of which nearly landed me in prison on state security charges after the Iranian embassy, at the behest of its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, sued me for expressing my opinion about the Supreme Leader.
For reasons that have become all too well known, my anxieties have intensified. Among these reasons are Iran’s refusal to accept arbitration in the dispute over the Emirati islands, its expansion of political, ideological, and military influence into four Arab states, the negative repercussions we have suffered in the Gulf, Iran’s illogical stance on the Durra gas field, and the repeated border incursions by some Iraqi militias loyal to Iran.
It was natural for apprehension towards Iran to increase, especially after its complete preoccupation with foreign affairs at the expense of its people’s well-being, despite being the only country in the world, besides the United States, that possesses everything any government could dream of.
The Iranian leadership could have made it a paradise on earth. But perhaps the leadership’s preoccupation with another paradise led them to neglect the welfare of their people, and we all paid a heavy price, and continue to do so. The Israeli-American war on Iran came, followed by a second Israeli- American war.
These wars could have been a factor in overlooking all of Iran’s transgressions and building solidarity or sympathy with it in the face of Zionist expansionist hegemony and arrogance, coveting our lands and resources. But the situation changed completely after a large number of Iranian missiles and drones rained down on civilian targets and our homes, through no fault of our own. Iran never needed to control four weak Arab states or the militias within them, because the poor conditions of those states constituted a financial, political, and moral burden for it.
It is possible to understand the justifications of some that Iran’s war or hostility towards Israel drove it to seek allies if those states or militias were truly helpful to Iran and not an insatiable financial burden. Those who support or ally for money will cease their support when the money runs out.
Hostility towards Israel or insistence on conflict with it cannot be achieved simply by gaining allies who form a ring around that state, assuming they possess sufficient power. Iran should have started by strengthening its internal front before seeking to gain poor and weak allies. Iran’s battle with Israel likely began with the handover of the keys to the Israeli embassy in Tehran to the PLO, which then used it as its embassy headquarters.
It was clear then that it would be a thorn in Israel’s side. For more than forty years, the Zionist leadership sought to persuade every American president to stand with them to eliminate the clerical regime in Tehran. Finally, Israel found someone to fulfill its demands. Meanwhile, none of the resistance states did anything to prepare for the day of battle. Israel had its plans, programs, and preparations, and thus succeeded in exhausting and weakening its adversaries one after another. Israel does not want any strong state in the region, no matter whether it is ruled by ideological or dictatorial regimes. Israel does not want educated populations around it, nor even advanced economies.
Israel had already succeeded in achieving its goals, and therefore it had to eliminate the troublesome regime in Tehran. Victory over Israel, today as always, requires preparation from within before preparation from without. Perhaps we once had the time to do so, but it seems that most, if not all, of Israel’s adversaries have lost that advantage. Comparing the situations of some of our countries to Israel, we find that administrative, political, and military corruption has weakened some of our Arab regimes.
Furthermore, the quality and quantity of our education are far inferior to those of Israel. The percentage of the poor and illiterate among us is much higher. The number of those yearning to flee our countries is constantly increasing. The number of those killed in the streets of some Arab cities by their own soldiers is perhaps greater than the number killed by others. Last but not least, the number of those willing to betray their homeland is unusually higher than what we find in Israel.
Countries hostile to Israel have failed to recruit spies, perhaps due to loyalty. Read some articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and you will understand why we are so weak. Note: This article was written two days ago, according to Ramadan publishing requirements, before the Iranian president apologized for targeting the Gulf states and pledged to stop the aggression against us.
By Ahmad alsarraf email: [email protected]
