Iran Sowed the Wind and Reaps the Whirlwind

Iran has been set back but is still defiant. The slogans that Ayatollahs used to buttress their power: “To hell with Zionists  (Seyhuniha be jahannam) and “Death to America” (marg bar America) still sound but the country is at a crossroads.

These intimidating slogans became so regular and commonplace, that many of the mullahs instead of beginning their sermons with bismillah (in the name of Allah) intoned one or the other slogan against Israel and America.

Why is the theocratic regime in Iran hostile and vengeful towards the state of Israel and its citizens? No convincing reply is there, not even from the Ayatollahs. Iran and Israel are not contiguous, their languages, ethnic origins, histories, geographies, cultures, and lifestyles have little in common. Why then the animosity?

Two observations can be made. First, the proselytized Iranian Islamic theologians and jurisconsults claim to be true Muslims because they honour the Quranic injunction of fighting Jews, unlike the Arabs of today.  

The second observation is that the United States has been the enemy number one (Shaitan-I-rajeem) or “the Devil incarnate” supporting Israel because of the dominant influence of Jews on the American government and economy.

 If, according to some interpretations, the Holy Quran prescribes waging war on a particular community for whatever reasons, then Allah is neither rahmatu’n lil alameen (blessing for the two worlds) nor ar rahman-ar  raheem (the benevolent forgiver)

Why did Iran approach the UN SC invoking the clauses of human rights and demanding that the SC chastise Israel and ensure restoration of peace there? The Iranian regime claims to harbour no ill feelings towards Jews but oppose the Zionist takeover of Palestine and the creation of what is widely regarded as an Apartheid regime imposed by immigrant Jews on local Arabs. Indeed, there are Jews who live in Iran as citizens and are  represented in the Majlis (Parliament) but do not regard themselves as Zionists.

Regarding the second allegation against the USA, that country has a democratic Constitution which separates religion from state affairs. It is not Iran’s business to interfere in US domestic politics and society, just as no other country should have a say in the role and position of religious communities in Iranian society. It is true that the USA imposed the late Shah’s rule on Iran and exploited the nation during the Pahlevi monarchy but that era is over and it would be in Iran’s interest to move on.

Iran’s complaint is that Jews have grabbed Palestinian territory belonging to Muslims, following the Balfour Declaration of 1917, expressing British support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, provided it caused no harm, prejudice or loss to the people already living in that area. 

Following World War II and the British decision to terminate the mandate, the United Nations proposed a plan to partition Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states. On May 14, 1948, the State of Israel was proclaimed, following a violent campaign for independence by Zionist activists and paramilitary operatives. Clashes and riots began almost immediately between Palestinians and Jews and the latter proceeded to massively expel and expropriate many of the former.

If that development was not acceptable to Iran, it should have confronted the British government and not Israel at the time but the Imperial government maintained cordial relations with Britain (which helped overthrow the democratically elected Mossadegh government in 1952) and also with Israel. 

None of Iran’s reasons for belligerence towards Israel is supported by logic. In other words, by sticking to that hostile posture, Iran gives a motive for Israel to take preventive and retaliatory action against the Islamic Republic.

Some Iranian experts in the West assert that Iran never became truly Islamic. More than anybody else, the Shia theologians and jurisconsults are conscious of this reality. The simple reason is that a thousand years of Achaemenid, Parthian, and Sassanian empires had built a civilisation and a nation that would not easily accept an alien civilisation and culture. That is the reason why soon after the Arab conquest of Iran and until the modern era there were native revolts which failed but periodically revived indigenous traditions, often in the form of mystical and nationalistic interpretations of the faith.

Of course, Islamic Iran’s clergy has long wielded considerable influence with the lower classes yet, conspicuously that class never exercised power in the past. The 1979 Islamic Revolution of Iran is clearly distinguishable from earlier commotions. The Ayatollahs grabbed the government and imposed rigid Islamism and the rule of sharia, often at odds with the native ethos, tradition, and mindset. 

The animus Iran has been nursing against Israel all these years has been the main cause of the problems and tragedies the country has experienced since 1979. It is an irony of fate that an illustrious nation with a glorious past and a rich cultural heritage, a people gifted with intelligence, wisdom, and talent as well as many precious natural resources should be in dire straits as a result of its actions:  after sowing the wind one should expect the whirlwind.

The supreme religious leader, who used to issue death warrants to Israel has had to hide in a bunker Voices demanding regime change are growing louder despite ruthless State repression. The country’s economy is in a bad state. Russia and China have provided some support but the Muslim world is keeping quiet or giving only lip service. The fact that Israel has been partly devastated and greatly weakened by the Iranian missile strikes does not bring much respite to its wounded enemy. 

The redemption may come from a transition to a truly democratic and secular, or at least moderate regime that could establish friendly relations with most other countries without falling into the orbit of any of the superpowers. The ancient Iranian traditions of peaceful coexistence and extensive trade and cultural interaction with other nations must be revived and a new dispensation should be able to steer the country towards a stable and prosperous future in this time of great change and uncertainty.