- Iran strikes Syria, Iraq, and Pakistan, and Pakistan retaliates
- Iran sends a signal to the US that it is not afraid to escalate
After enduring the continuous bombing of its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah, and the new beginning of airstrikes hitting its ally in Yemen, the Houthis, as well as sustaining attacks on its people in Syria and Iraq, Iran has decided to finally retaliate and demonstrate to the world that it is not willing to sit back and watch its Middle East empire be razed by Israel and the western-led international liberal world order. An attack on Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, by Israel on January 2nd killed the deputy leader of Hamas Saleh al-Arouri without any reaction from the western nations to the American and British bombardment of Yemen, a war-torn nation that to this day already has 17 million Yemenis still food insecure. It seems apparent that Israel and the western nations do not care about the risk of escalation with Iran, or do they?
America does not want the conflict to widen, but Israel does
The US being a relatively new superpower whose time as number one is outlived by people still alive today, with the US becoming the unexpected sole superpower at the end of the 20th century after the fall of the Soviet Union, it becomes apparent that the US had not had prior experience in dealing with the responsibilities of becoming the sole superpower in the world. As George Friedman, one of the biggest geopolitical analysts of our time, says in his book named ‘The Storm before the Calm’, he wrote, ‘Managing an empire means using minimum force, because a global empire is likely to be constantly at war if its first response is to use its own military’. Yet in almost every conflict in this and previous centuries, America has been quick to lash out at its enemies and directly involve itself in conflicts it never really needed to. The British used relatively few soldiers and men to rule over India but rather used Indians to assist in the repression and exploitation of the land itself. On the other hand, America has directly involved its military in Korea, Vietnam, and, as of recent, the war on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other nations. This preoccupation has allowed other nations, such as China, to exploit the American exhaustion and occupation in these endless wars by growing and preparing for their own expansionist ambitions. As Joe Biden famously said during the American withdrawal of Afghanistan, ‘to focus on other challenges such as those in the South China Sea’.
The American withdrawal from Afghanistan and the future American withdrawal planned from Iraq and Syria have proved that America has understood that it does not befit it as a superpower to focus on everlasting wars. Therefore, we can conclude that America does not want the genocide in Gaza to widen or escalate into a war between its allies and different nations, such as Iran. America is demonstrating that it has grown from a child wielding a sword against anyone who disturbs it to a teenager aware of the greater good of de-escalation. The brunt of a war with Iran outweighs the benefits for both America and Iran. Iran also does not want this war to escalate, as it knows its economy and military will be severely damaged if it decides to face off against America regardless of the outcome. Iran would hope it could face its neighbouring adversaries and enemies without foreign involvement and intervention; hence, so far, it has refrained from attacking Israeli territory directly and American troops and positions. Even with the recent ongoing clashes between Hezbollah and Israel, there have been no reports that Iran has persuaded its ally Hezbollah to launch a full-scale offensive against Israel. Then why has Iran attacked neighbouring Syria, Iraq, and Pakistan if they do not believe that escalation is something they want? The answer to that question lies with Israeli foreign policy.
Why has Iran attacked?
What must be remembered is that Iran has the largest military in the Middle East, coming second is Turkey. If Iran had wanted it, it could literally bring chaos like the world has never seen this century if it had chosen to do so. Western intelligence and analysts are familiar with the Iranian military might and have seen it demonstrated in the Iran-Iraq war in 1988, in which Iran pushed Saddam Hussein’s forces out of their territory. So why has Iran attacked the provinces of its neighbouring nations, all of whom it considers allies? Syria, being led by the Bashar regime, has found itself heavily close knitted with the Iranian regime ever since the civil war broke out. Iran provided both logistical and military support to Bashar’s forces to help quash the rebellion. According to Iran, the attack in Syria was done against IS and hardline Sunni groups however there are no official reports of the attack hitting IS or hardline Sunni groups. The attack on Iraq, however, was an attack on the city of Irbil, in the Iraqi region of Kurdistan. Iran claimed it attacked a Mossad operations centre, but Iraqi and Kurdish authorities say that a well-known businessman, along with his wife and two kids, were killed in the strike. As of Pakistan, Iran claimed that it targeted an ‘Iranian terrorist group’, but Pakistan had said that Iran had killed two children.
This erratic behaviour from Iran is a show of defiance and force to America and its allies that it is not afraid to escalate the situation or widen the conflict if it is pushed to do so. Although, as I mentioned earlier, it does not benefit Iranian interests to be engaged in a conflict with America, these recent attacks show that Iran will do so if it feels pressured to do so via the demolition of its allies. From the US attacks in Yemen against its Houthi allies to the attacks in Syria, where a top Iranian commander was killed by Israel, to the continuous genocide taking place in Gaza, Iran has shown that they are ready to escalate the crisis if there isn’t a withdrawal or a cooling of American and Israeli aggression.
What does Pakistan’s retaliation show?
There is no doubt that between the 600-mile border between Iran and Pakistan, there has been both tension and clashes in the past. Iran has long believed that terrorists have been crossing the border; however, the timing of the strike on Thursday, in the midst of a genocide in Gaza and a streak of Iranian attacks on foreign countries, demonstrate that the Iranian attack was done as a response to the world that it no longer will stand aside whilst its allies are under fire in Yemen and Lebanon. However, as yesterday’s attacks have shown, it has been met with retaliation, in which nine people in Iran have been killed. Later, Iran’s foreign minister claimed it was ‘committed to good neighbouring relations with Pakistan’. This means that Iran has chosen to deescalate the situation with neighbouring Pakistan, and according to the Turkish foreign minister, Pakistan has also wanted to deescalate.
It must be noted that the unexpected attack on Pakistan may have likely confused the US and its allies while increasing their worry that the conflicts in the Middle East are widening. This is something that, even now, America would not want, for otherwise, with the current institutional relationship it has with its people, it will be forced to act as the self-proclaimed leader of the free world it is.
Why does Israel want the conflict to widen?
Although it does not fit America’s interests for this conflict to widen, Israel, whom America considers a staunch ally, has shown that it does indeed favour escalation. The attacks on Lebanon and Syria are evidence of that. Israel has done things in this period of Middle Eastern turmoil that it would only do if it were to hope that this conflict would widen. One of the things it has done to prove this is kill a high-ranking Iranian general within Syria.
An escalation in the Middle East means that Israel can continue its expansionist ambitions outside of Palestinian territory into neighbouring Lebanon as an excuse to eradicate its perceived enemy, Hezbollah, or perhaps even expand more into Syria or even into neighbouring Iraq. Israel has previously occupied South Lebanon from 1985–2000 in order to prevent the PLO from staying around its borders. There is no reason why they would not do so with international approval if Hezbollah from Lebanon were to escalate the northern border clashes. Israel believes that the land between the rivers Euphrates and Nile belongs to it, as the wall facing the Israeli House of Representatives says, “The borders of Israel expand from the Nile to the Euphrates.” This colonialist ambition is deeply ingrained in the Israelis, and it’s very possible that any escalation will be met with a round of joy from the Israelis, as it’ll mean Israel can gain international approval to expand into neighbouring territories.
