Misreading Iran: How ...
Page 1
As you examine the history of these groups since their inception, they have always operated as the exigencies of Palestine and Lebanon required and not when the strategic requirements of Iran necessitated. While Iran provided these groups with assistance and paid a heavy price for its principled position of support of the oppressed, not even a single instance can be found when these groups acted on behalf of Iran, or as its “proxy”, according to a dictionary definition.
Iran is now capable of defending itself without a need for proxies. It has spent decades building a formidable defense infrastructure. While Iran continues to rely on its people as the most important barrier against foreign aggression and external coercion, the country’s military innovations – from advanced missile technology to cutting-edge drones – have allowed it to maintain its security independently of external support. These achievements demonstrate a long-term strategy designed to ensure stability and sovereignty, irrespective of regional dynamics.
While setbacks to its allies, such as to Hezbollah, might temporarily impact Iran’s influence, they do not compromise its core deterrence. This autonomy has always been central to Tehran’s military posture and underscores its resilience amid external pressures.
Today, misreading and misunderstanding Iran is result of pundits grappling with the chaos of today’s world, especially in West Asia. At the heart of this chaos lies Israel’s unchecked impunity, which has shattered international norms and created a dangerous precedent for states’ behavior. Israel’s actions in Gaza have become emblematic of this impunity. The indiscriminate bombing of hospitals, residential areas, and critical infrastructure has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians. The blockade of humanitarian aid has left millions without food, water, medicine or even heat to keep their babies alive in the winter.
Beyond Gaza, Israel’s conduct continues to erode stability across the region. Routine airstrikes in Syria and Lebanon have targeted civilians, journalists, and humanitarian workers, while its use of advanced technology to weaponize communication devices exemplifies its disregard for ethical and legal norms.
This pattern of behavior, met with silence or tacit approval from powerful actors, has distorted analysts’ interpretations of state behavior. In such a lawless environment, even defensive actions by nations like Iran can be misread as aggressive or desperate.
Iran’s actions, far from signaling a shift toward nuclear weapons, reflect a long-standing strategy of maintaining sovereignty and stability through self-reliance. Tehran’s deterrence framework remains consistent with its approach to security for its sovereignty. Rather than reacting to perceived desperation as some suggest, Iran continues to act in line with its established strategic objectives.
The fixation on Iran as a potential nuclear threat also diverts attention from the broader issue of Israel’s role in destabilizing the region. Its unchecked actions not only exacerbate humanitarian crises but also undermine global norms, creating an environment conducive to nuclear proliferation.
The claims of a nuclear pivot are a reflection not of Tehran’s strategy but of a global order in disarray. Reframing the narrative requires confronting the real drivers of instability and reaffirming the principles of accountability and justice.