Doctrinal Revisions

For the end of this long day – and pending an Israeli land invasion of Lebanon – the third and final feature. This one is primarily motivated by lots of questions I’ve received today, all in style, of:

…‘and what is your solution to the problem between Arabs and Israel/Zionism’?

Me thinks, the core issue is actually plain simple: grant, finally, everybody exactly the same rights.

The Middle East needs a fundamental revision of the doctrine – and that from everybody involved. Foremost ‘the West’. Indeed: starting with ‘the West’.

Forget your ethno/race- and religion-based prejudice, accept and treat everybody in the Middle East as equal: because the fact is that we’re all human beings, with exactly the same rights, privileges and responsibilities.

When that is done, nobody needs Israel, nobody needs Palestine, no two-state solution or whatever.

To do so, one needs not ‘destroying Israel’: ‘switch off’ the racist- and religious indoctrination (for example in the Israeli educational system); organise serious and professional judiciary and executive organs; investigate and punish all the war crimes and war criminals (on both sides, of course). That part would be cheaper to do than continuous financial aid for another year of Netanyahu’s rampage against everything and everybody around him.

…down to one point: a just solution would have to include a way to compensate Palestinians for – for example – being subjected to 100+ years of aggression, loss of life, freedom, and (nearly) all their possessions.

I haven’t thought it much beyond that point simply because nothing of this is ever going to happen (at least not in the time of my life). Indeed, when I try to think about this solution, a ‘dream’ if you like, I get struck precisely at the issue of the (astronomic) cost of the resulting compensation: who’s going to pay for that? Great Britain? France? USA? Israel? UN? Saudi Arabia? Qatar….?

And still, fact remains: without making everybody equal, and then seriously and consequently treating everybody as equal, and then tracking down and making accountable all those responsible for for all the horrors, terror and damage… without justice, sorry: there’s no trace of chance for ‘peace’ in the Middle East.

This is why I haven’t thought it beyond that point. Because that with ‘peace’ is day-dreaming.

BTW, because I think it’s going to be ‘topical’ in the coming days, weeks, and months (probably: years too), here a good example for what happens when people feel mistreated and when they find there’s no justice.

The example is centred on the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). Or, better said, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Might appear ‘not-related’. But, I would recommend you to read the following before jumping to such conclusions.

***

Terminology

Axis = as readers of Moscow’s Game of Poker know, that’s my abbreviation for ‘Axis of Islamic Resistance’: the way the Hezbollah-members like to talk about themselves; correspondingly, the ‘Axis’ is including them, IRGC, Khatyib Hezbollah in Iraq, Hezbollah in Syria, and the Houthis

IASF = Israel Air-Space Force (official designation since 2004)

IDF = Israel Defence Force

IRGC = Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (pay attention: no ‘Iranian’, but ‘pan-national’, ‘Islamic’)

IRGC-QF = IRGC Qods Force, the IRGC’s ‘Operations Abroad Department’

IRI = Islamic Republic of Iran

***

Note: henceforth, any trolls will be - irreversibly - banned, without any further warnings.

***

To start with, from much of ‘the West’s’-, but especially from Netanyahu’s point of view (and that of all the Zionist extremists), the situation in the Middle East right now cannot be any simpler. If anybody attacks Israel in fashion and with force the Israelis are attacking the others, that’s an ‘existential threat’ for Israel, and they’re shooting back - with nukes.

If the US administration is not letting them do as they like, Zionist associations in the USA (AIPAC and different other ‘PACs’) are withdrawing their support, and the admin is losing the next elections.

The Europeans? They’re ‘responsible for the Holocaust’ and thus have nothing to say: in worst case – i.e. if facing an ‘existential threat’ – Israel is going to nuke them, too…

Thus having a free hand, Netanyahu seems to be aiming for modelling some kind of ‘new order’ in the Middle East: one where the Hamas is destroyed, Palestinians ethnically cleansed out of Israel/Palestine; Hezbollah is destroyed and southern Lebanon secured for Israel (Zionist real estate companies are already advertising parcels there); the IRGC forced to shut up (if not destroyed); Israel – and especially the IDF – has ‘avenged’ 7 October 2023, and the Israeli intelligence services have restored their reputation and are feared once again (where it was foremost Netanyahu and his government that curbed their activities before 7 October 2023….but… well… nevermind).

That’s why Netanyahu’s ‘war on Hamas…. extended into Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and, if necessary Iran’ - is named the ‘Operation New Order’…

***

I happen to have researched the Iran-Iraq War extensively (actually: still researching and publishing about it; here the newest example), and thus came in touch with a number of IRGC-officers over the time (so much so, slightly over a decade ago, lovely IRGC’s Judge Abolqasem Salvatti issued an arrest warrant for me as ‘an agent of Mi6, BND, and HNA’).

Ironically, and between others, that granted me some insights into how various of IRGC-officers are thinking.

From the point of view of the IRGC – the situation is ‘slightly more complex’ than that of Netanyahu & Co KG GesmbH. Primary reason is the complex way in which Iran is actually governed: as explained in The Mess of Russo-Iranian Arms Deals, Part 1, there’s an official government, but all executive powers are actually in the hands of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, ‘Ayatollah’ Ali Khamenei. The task of safeguarding the Supreme Leader’s position, and the control of the clergy over the state is that of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Force (IRGC). Atop of that, the IRGC is not just a para-military service: different of cliques in charge of it are also controlling large parts of the Iranian (and, meanwhile, Iraqi) economy. It’s an economic power.

C-in-C IRGC, Major-General Mohammad Ali Jafari… if I’m to ask: the strongman in Iran.

Now, as long as there is some semblance of ‘balance’ between different cliques within the IRGC, and the Supreme Leader, and the ‘secular’ government, everything is OK. Sure, in theory, the IRGC could remove both of the other two parties in a matter of minutes. In practice, it can’t: if for no other reason then because losing support of the Supreme Leader, publicly, would not only ‘jeopardise its own position’, but result in its downfall.

Still, the IRGC is – also thanks to ‘laws’ positioning it above all the other laws valid in the IRI –  already now ruling as it likes. It does have to maintain a ‘pretension of law and order’.

That’s as important because many in the West are considering the IRI for a ‘theocracy’, and thus making the mistake of considering the IRGC-members for some sort of ‘Islamic kamikaze’: religious fanatics ready to blow up themselves or get killed at every opportunity, and whatever else. Particularly silly are those thinking the IRGC (and/or Hezbollah) is thinking like the Daesh (aka ‘Islamic State’) and is promising ’72 virgins’ to every of its ‘martyrs’….

To put it mildly: that’s ridiculous.

No doubt: most of IRGC’s top ranks are religious. And yes, they are Muslims. However, fundaments of their religion is Shi’a Islam (and then the Twelver Shi’a), and not some insane miscarriage of Egyptian Salafism and Saudi Wahhabism. Foremost, it’s since decades already that the actual grades by which the IRGC is recruiting its members are ‘personal recommendation, based on skills, loyalty, and patriotism’. No religion.

With other words: the IRGC is a meritocracy.

Now, with different minor exceptions here and there (see: ‘every Iranian = two different political parties’), the way the IRGC-people are thinking and seeing the world around themselves is perfectly realistic. Unsurprisingly, their assessments about their own and, for example, Israeli capabilities and intentions are particularly sober, too – and not the least dominated by any kind of religious zeal (nor suicidal intentions).

They know that Iran is a big country, that its economy and infrastructure are fragile, and thus they’re ‘overstretched’: they’ve got too many objects to defend and thus the Israelis can hurt them easily. Above all, they have studied earlier wars, especially the October 1973 Arab-Israeli war, and know that Israel was already then declaring it an ‘existential threat’ when Egypt and Syria merely attempted to recover the Sinai and the Golan Heights: the Israeli minister of defence suffered a nervous breakdown (or several of them); as result, Israel began blackmailing the USA with its nukes (see Document 21B; for the complete story of that affair, see 1973: The First Nuclear War; the reason for that project was a number of related rumours I’ve got to hear both Egypt and Iran).

With other words: there was no threat for Israel’s survival in October 1973. Nevertheless, when taken by surprise and attacked the country promptly goes into ‘panic’ mode - as, from the IRGC’s point of view, ‘proven’ when multiple members of the Knesset demanded deployment of nuclear weapons against the Gaza Strip, in the aftermath of 7 October 2023.

Therefore, the IRGC’s assessment is that nowadays, in the case of an all-out war between Iran and Israel, Netanyahu would promptly declare ‘existential threat’ and start shooting nukes at Iran.

That’s where that with granting everybody the same rights would be so important. ‘The West’ is not doing that. Correspondingly, and after all of the Iranian experiences with ‘the West’, the IRGC knows they need not expecting anybody there – whether in Washington, London, Brussel, Berlin, or Paris – to at least complain if Netanyahu starts nuking Iran.

Their conclusion is: ‘the West’ is not treating Iran, Palestinians, etc. even-handedly.

The IRGC’s argumentation further goes along these lines: ‘the civilised West’ doesn’t mind when Israel (actually, they’re using ‘Zionist Entity’) massacres 50,000 Palestinian in a year of ‘war on Hamas’ (not to talk about all those killed over the last 75-100 years), and that’s no ‘terror’, and is going to have 0 consequences for Israel? While, on the contrary, ‘the civilised West’ is supporting this massacre instigated by Israel, while damning their ‘Axis’ as ‘terrorist organisation’? Has the IRGC – whether in combination with- or without Hezbollah and Hamas – ever massacred 50,000 Israeli civilians? Are Palestinians, Iranians, and Lebanese worth less than the Israelis?

They see this way of thinking confirmed, time and again.

For example: in April this year, Israel bombed the IRGC… erm… ‘Iranian embassy’ in Damascus, killing a number of IRGC officers. Did ‘the West’ protest? Nope. It went as far as to declare that building ‘no embassy’.

However, when the IRGC wanted to retaliate against Israel, in April this year, all ‘the West’ – from Washington to Berlin – was on the phone to Tehran, demanding them not to hit back on Israel, ‘not to escalate’. Like if they were the first to do so. The IRGC is firmly convinced they were not (and, if you check Ronen Bergman’s The Secret War with Iran, he is in agreement).

Eventually, the IRGC did strike back, but ‘mildly’. ‘Just a bit’. In a rather ‘demonstrative’, than ‘we want blood’-fashion. They’ve announced their ‘strike’ hours in advance so that USA and Israel were able to ready their defences, and Israel suffered – according to its own claims – no damage. Immediately after, Tehran made it clear: this was the use of Article 51 of the UN Charter (see: ‘self-defence), and the affair is (quote) ‘concluded’. As explained back in April, the message was, ‘we’re happy: if you stop shooting at us, we’ll stop shooting at you’.

Did Netanyahu stop?

Of course he didn’t. Few days later, the IASF ‘hit back’ with air-launched ballistic missiles. Perhaps it caused some damage, but probably none at all. One way or the other, and once again, half ‘the West’ was on the telephone, calling Tehran not to escalate. Meanwhile, Israel happily went on killing Palestinians and then the Lebanese too, and ‘the West’ did nothing to stop this: on the contrary, most of ‘the West’ continued supplying arms and ammunition to Israel – so also when Netanyahu repeatedly sabotaged cease-fire negotiations through issuing ever additional demands…

With other words: the West ‘screwed us’ (the IRGC and the Axis… and Iran), once gain...’

The question is therefore how long and what it might take until the IRGC gets seriously fed up?

***

Indeed, earlier today, one could already hear ‘loud voices’ from Tehran, questioning, ‘why don’t we hit back?’

Now, as of April this year, the IRI was still (at least officially) ruled by the administration of the late President Ebrahim Raisi. At home in Iran, Raisi and his cabinet loved praising themselves as ‘pro-Axis’, and its ‘biggest supporters’. Even much of the IRGC considered them as such, although I would have described them as ‘rather hawkish’: ‘wannabe-hawks, but not really’. For example: in the light of Netanyahu’s rampage around the Middle East, Raisi could’ve easily at least demanded for much more massive arms deliveries to Hezbollah, and the IRGC would’ve been delighted to ‘follow the order’. But, he did not, and thus very little happened in this regards. Indeed, as described above, in April this year Raisi let himself be influenced by Western demands, and the IRGC ‘retaliated’ in a very lukewarm fashion.

In May, Raisi was then killed in a helicopter accident, and in July Massoud Pezeshkian elected in his place.

Mind: as the things are in the IRI, Pezeshkian is actually a member of a clique the mastermind of which is Mohammad Javad Zarif. In the West, Zarif is known as the ‘face of the IRI’ from negotiations for the JPCOA, a decade ago.

Pay attention: from the IRGC’s point of view, ‘hesitant’ Pezeshkian doesn’t matter. The one that matters is Zarif. And, for the IRGC, Zarif is ‘much too pro-USA’. This, even more so considering ‘Mossad’ then went so far as to assassinate Ismail Haniyeh, leader of Hamas, in Tehran, and that during Raisi’s funeral. And in August, Israel then went as far as to ‘pre-emptively’ (ho-hum) demlish most of Hezbollah’s arsenal of long-range ballistic missiels.

Neither Zarif nor Pezeshkian ‘reacted’ (the way the IRGC would have wanted them to do). And then, few days ago, Netanyahu ordered assassination of Nasrallah and de-facto the entire leadership of Hezbollah… and, Zarif (and Pezeshkian) still didn’t move. Not even when one of top commanders of the IRGC-QF was assassinated (together with Nasrallah): indeed, not even when – at last according to rumours from that corner – an Israeli air strike might have killed Maher al-Assad at his home in north-western suburbs of Damascus, yesterday.

Maher was not only the brother of Bashar al-Assad, Syrian dictator, but also the crucial linchpin in the connection between Hezbollah/IRGC and the Hezbollah in Syria…

And now it comes…

Earlier today, the Majlis (Parliament in Tehran) opened a discussion about (quote), ‘need to revise the Iranian nuclear doctrine’. Stated reason: (Iran’s) ‘international relations (to ‘Zionist Entity’) were based on the balance of power…. (This is not the case anymore, and therefore) something must be done before it’s too late.’

‘Iranian nuclear doctrine’?

I guess I’ve missed a lot in my life, but: so far, I only once met anybody from ‘the West’ with a serious clue about this topic. At most, the last few years we’ve got to hear Netanyahu complaining that Iran is ‘5 minutes short of getting a nuke’. Essentially: the same complaint like Israelis are complaining all the time already since 1996 or so. But, even he didn’t babble about ‘Iranian nuclear doctrine’: probably because that would put the IRI at the same level with Israel…?

However, the IRI does have a nuclear doctrine. The same is ‘merely not taken very seriously in the West’ (at least not in the public). If at all, it’s ridiculed because it’s actually a religious law – a fatwa.

What a surprise, in a country considered a ‘theocracy’, isn’t it?

Indeed, if it’s known outside Iran at all, then as the ‘Nuclear Fatwa’ (of 2003). Essentially, back then, and in reaction to severe pressure from the USA (on behalf of Israel), the ‘Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution’ (‘Ayatollah’ Ali Khamenei, he’s still the ‘Supreme Leader’) legislated Iran not to possess nuclear weapons.

Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, ‘Ayatollah’ Khamenei (where I’m putting ‘Ayatollah’ under apostrophes, because at least a part of the Shi’a clergy of Iran is considering him as lacking qualifications for that title…)

Those paying serious attention about that fatwa quickly noticed that it, actually, included one ‘condition’: Iran is not to possess nuclear weapons – in assembled condition.

In other words: the IRI has all the necessary ‘ingredients’ (call them ‘parts’, if you prefer). That fatwa is merely preventing the IRGC from putting them together. Moreover it’s ‘safeguarding’ an important requirement: for the IRGC to start assembling Iranian nukes, it needs a permission from Khamenei.

Which is where things are getting really interesting.

As described above, for the IRGC, even the official government of the IRI isn’t really a ‘problem’. They’re like Netanyahu and his extremists: above the laws, and can do as they like. But, they still need at least some semblance of ‘popular support’.

Or, at other times, ‘popular opposition’.

Take the case of the IRGC violating the Constitution of the IRI when permitting the Russians to base their Tupolev Tu-22M-3 bombers in Iran, back in summer 2016. Sure, when several members of the Majlis complained, and started asking unpleasant question, and this was aired on the TV, they were ‘politely escorted out’. However, eventually, even the IRGC had to bow, and send the Russians packing back home.

Thus, when today members of the Majlis start demanding a ‘revision of the nuclear doctrine’… i.e. Khamenei’s Nuclear Fatwa….?

Well, I’m ready to start taking bets for how long it might take until Khamenei bows to ‘popular demand’ (read: IRGC’s demands). Publicly or, more likely, not.

That said, this is particularly ironic for reasons related to the IRGC’s doctrine – which is quite a flexible, at least ‘highly adaptive’ issue. For example, back in 2003, when the USA launched invasion of Iraq, the IRGC got scared that Iran is going to be the next. Realising that its defence capabilities are insufficient, it developed the ‘Mosaic Doctrine’ (no idea if it’s officially called that way: I know it under that designation): it de-centralised its chain of command so to enable local commanders and units to run a guerrilla warfare in the case of an US-invasion.

A year or so later, when realising how easily it can keep the USA struck in Iraq – through helping incompetent American administrators provoke a bloody religious and ‘civil’ war – it switched over to the ‘Pre-emption Doctrine’ (again, no idea about official designation). The essence of the same was that the IRGC expected to find out about a coming US-invasion on time, and pre-empt this with a massive asymmetric strike on US military bases and commercial interests all over the Middle East. And so on…

….for the case of a war with Israel, the IRGC has what I call the ‘Patience Doctrine’.

From their point of view, an all-out war with a hysteric nuclear power is leading only in one direction – which is ‘not good’ because of that Nuclear Fatwa. Therefore, already since around 2007-2008, and independently from the Supreme Leader or anybody in the IRI government, for the case of a war with Israel – like there is currently one – the IRGC adopted the doctrine of involving Israel in a continuous, prolonged conventional conflict: one that is stressing the Israeli economy and wearing out both the IDF and the population.

Netanyahu is thus playing straight into their hands, and the IRGC knows this. Indeed, it knows this so well, that for the last 10+ years it was ‘custom-tailoring’ Hezbollah for just such an eventuality. Thanks to Netanyahu’s assassination of Nasrallah, the IRGC is now in firmer control over Hezbollah than ever before, and thus it must be expected to guide its surrogate into fighting in exactly the same fashion.

***

Of course, you’re free to declare this for ‘Iranian dreams about re-establishing the Persian Empire’ and whatever else, if you like it that way. After all, the IRGC has no problem to conclude they’re ‘fighting a Zionist Empire’.

And, they have all the time of the World.

Plus, they might now get their ‘voice’ bolstered by a major switch in the country’s nuclear doctrine.

Precisely because they feel mistreated, by Israel in particularly, and the West atop of that, and because it’s a matter of fact they are not considered equal – whether by Zionists, or ‘the West’, or whomever else you might like.

Where shall I congratulate?