Iran at forefront ...
Page 1
Under the current circumstances, how significant is Iran's resistance to this doctrine and strategy, and what impact could it have on the future of other countries?
The Low-Intensity Conflict doctrine is built on the assumption that countries targeted by this strategy will eventually become weak, isolated and internally divided. Iran's resistance and response have demonstrated that this assumption is fundamentally flawed. By strengthening its defensive capabilities, Iran has shown the United States and Israel that it possesses credible deterrence. At the same time, social media have exposed Zionist propaganda and falsehoods, and people around the world no longer accept official narratives without question. Iran's resistance, therefore, is not only a legitimate right but also a necessity for bringing this vicious cycle to an end.
At the same time, some argue that negotiations and flexibility could reduce tensions and pressure. What is your assessment of this view?
Negotiations should be genuine and aimed at producing tangible results, and there must also be trust between the negotiating parties. However, the Americans have repeatedly demonstrated that they are not trustworthy. A review of past events shows that fabricated ceasefires and sham negotiations have merely served as tools for buying time and prolonging aggression. Gaza and Lebanon are clear examples, where Israel has continued its crimes, openly violating agreements. Likewise, by imposing unjust sanctions on Iran while backing Zionism, the United States has shown in practice that it is not seeking peace but rather managing violence. Under such circumstances, Iran's steadfastness within the framework of international law and in defense of its sovereignty remains the only way to preserve regional and global security, which is being crushed under this unjust doctrine.
To what extent have such strategies inflicted damage on countries and contributed to humanitarian catastrophes?
Unfortunately, the figures are catastrophic. According to research conducted by Brown University's "Watson" Institute, US-led wars since 2001 have resulted in approximately 4.5 million deaths and 38 million displaced people across West Asia and North Africa. More tragic, however, is the fact that sanctions claim even more victims than war itself. Since 2010, US sanctions alone have reportedly caused the deaths of more than one million children due to malnutrition. This amounts to a hidden crime—one even deadlier than the battlefield itself.
Given this reality, what responsibility do governments and nations around the world bear in confronting such war-driven strategies and supporting Iran's resistance to them?
Today marks a historic turning point. By standing firm against Trump and Netanyahu, the Islamic Republic of Iran has effectively positioned itself on the front line of the struggle against the Low-Intensity Conflict doctrine. Peace-seeking governments and freedom-loving people around the world should therefore unite in calling, once and for all, for an end to this doctrine, which poses a permanent threat to the world's peoples and hangs over all nations like the Sword of Damocles. Standing with Iran means standing for sovereignty, security and international law. The only way to save humanity from the crises of the twenty-first century is through collective cooperation to contain US aggression and the expansionist policies of the Israeli regime.