Iran has softened its ideology, altered its aims and opted for cooperation rather than confrontation outside its borders say members of the containment lobby. Past willingness of the Islamic Republic to cooperate with the US is presented in evidence.
Proponents of containment mistake changes in the message for changes in underlying ideology. Iran knows that it is not always in its interests to frighten the west with threats and has become adept at managing its image in order to prevent this. Expurgated versions of its ideas are circulated for western media consumption. Contemporary followers of Ayatollah Khomenei see the west as corrupt and un-reformable but attractive to Iran’s own people. The best defence is therefore offence; Iran must defend itself when necessary but the long-term aim is to defeat the west and make possible the global triumph of its ideology.
Iran’s foreign policy is guided by similar principles. Flexible enough to retreat when threatened but to advance when the coast is clear, Iran cooperated with the US in Afghanistan when it feared that it might be linked to the 2001 Al Qaeda attacks in America. As the threat of force receded so did the cooperation. Its nuclear programme is also a good example of its fundamentally uncompromising nature.
The hardliners’ tactical retreats are a straw clutched at by those favouring containment to provide evidence of a sea-change in behaviour. Extrapolating from these they conclude that Iran is now a ‘rational’ actor placing survival above ideology. This implies that suicide is a sign of madness, yet even terrorists are usually not mad while often willing to die for their beliefs.
Those who have concluded that survival overrides ideology are guilty of what Edward Said, the influential Palestinian writer called ‘orientalism’; western false assumptions about the east. In the secular west these worldly concerns are part of our cultural DNA, but are misleading when applied to the Middle East. Iran’s radicals are being seen by those who want to justify containment through the prism of a kind of survival materialism. Martyrdom, being prepared to die for one’s religious beliefs, is part of the culture.
There is very little that is life-enhancing about the regime which could justify a claim that its leaders are mainly concerned with survival. It has little to offer its people except a message of hate. The other side of hatred directed toward outsiders is hatred towards one’s own people and ultimately toward oneself, as was the case with Hitler in his last days. It is misguided to think that such individuals place a high value on life.
Even if individual hardliners wanted to buck the trend, they are part of an entrenched and inflexible system heavily reinforced over the years. Having got rid of the reformers and pragmatists the regime is ill-equipped to make adjustments to the outside world. There is a self-destructive streak wound into the system itself.
The likelihood is that hate directed outwards under these conditions will bring about the demise of the regime if their own people don’t bring it about first. Iran would likely take risks under containment despite the odds being stacked against it. Deterrence is not an exact science; they could gamble by arming terrorists or make a nuclear strike against Israel. Given their unpopularity at home, they may feel that they have little to lose by taking a desperate gamble while willing to accept martyrdom if they don’t succeed. In recognition of the fact that an offer of friendship alone is unlikely to succeed in nuclear talks, President Obama has not taken the use of military force off the table. Israel may strike Iran to destroy its bomb-making capacity.
If conflict is to be avoided, it needs to be made clear with urgency by everyone able to do so, directly to President Obama or via this government, that the hardliners have not changed their spots. A bomb in their hands would be incompatible with the security of all and would not be acceptable.
Photo: Steve Rhodes
“The closer Iran gets to having the bomb ” – and the evidence for this is ? “The best defence is therefore offence; Iran must defend itself when necessary but the long-term aim is to defeat the west and make possible the global triumph of its ideology” – oh dear the same neo con ideology that justified the illegal iraq war. “In the secular west ” – the west is only secular superficially. “It has little to offer its people except a message of hate. ” – certainly not true “as was the case with Hitler in his last days” – wasnt hitler an european, catholic/atheist superficially of a secualr state? ” Israel may strike Iran to destroy its bomb-making capacity.” – and what capacity is that? iaea says no evidence and certainly all nuclear material is accounted for. “A bomb in their hands would be incompatible with the security of all and would not be acceptable.” – one bomb with no means of delivery or detonation, vs 10 000 bombs pointing in its direction . really this is such a poor article. in fact its shameful that grown ups have to read it.
This article completely misses the reality of what is going on in Iran. I’ve been fortunate enough to visit Iran several times in the last few years, and have probably had more senior access to decision-makers than most. The last vestiges of genuine theocracy disappeared in June 2009 and what has been in place since then is an unstable oligarchy under an IRGC ‘siloviki’. The parallels with the fall of communism in Russia are close, and what is now under way is a continuing struggle for the prize of control of Iran’s oil and gas complex – because as with Russia, that’s where the money is. It wasn’t a ‘coup’ – it was a hostile takeover bid. Iran are not the remotest threat – the real worry is Pakistan, who actually have nukes already and the sort of radicalism Iran last had 20 years ago. The truth is that it suits the Iranian pragmatists in power to master nuclear technology short of a bomb, and keep the West guessing, because tweaking the Great Satan’s tail is a good Nationalist distraction from their economic woes. Similarly, the Israelis know perfectly well there’s no Iranian nuclear threat, but it suits them to rattle sabres as a distraction while they quietly continue to create realities on the ground.
and then isn’t it imperative the world,including India ,including the Arab countries ? help Pakistan with the enormous problems it faces : coming lack of drinking water (yes ,hard to believe) :deforestation ( the Taliban and ‘timber mafia’ stockpiled timber exacerbating flood damage ,70% forests illegally cut-only 5% forest remaining.) Site of badly needed dam ? whilst having to deal with maintaining troops at 21,000 ft. to oppose India : geological ‘seismic ‘ threat. HELP this country and their ‘threat’ to us will be gone. Is there possibly competition over help therefore it does not happen ?
“the real worry is Pakistan, who actually have nukes already and the sort of radicalism Iran last had 20 years ago.” – this is entirely horlicks. though the neo con voices in america and their shills in the uk have been demanding an invasion since the covert operations involving special forces and hired so called pak taliban have not resulted in the outcomes that has justified an all out war – that was pretty much signaled by obama during his nomination for the democratic presidential candidate and the conflation of the afghan debacle as afpak. less than 3% of the public voted for islamic parties in the recent elections, the terrorism against ordinary pak citizens has meant they have received little support (also wikileaks acknowledges the covert arming – training of so called pak taliban by india, pak government has stated that uk forces are training proxies and nyt has reported a 3000 strong death squads operated by the usa) – the drone attacks with best estimate of 2 to 3% success rate clearly resolves itself in creating a dislike of the usa, and its forces inside of afghanistan and pakistan. – what the intent of usa-uk is not the issue of radicals/terrorism since that does not need a base as northern ireland has shown us, but the denuking of pak so that regional super power nexus of israel – india can be created – taking control of valuable resources/assets whilst denying china and russia.
and I would just like to add,well done to the East London Hockey team,all Pakistani guys who have just qualified for the Olympics,they all looked so great on telly tonight,articulate ,cheery ,optimistic and out to do do well for GB as they all said! see,that’s the world we want.