Kasparov, as a Ukrainian-American I am a fan of both your political work and your illustrious career, but one specific line from this piece echoes the sentiments, in my view, that directly led to the catastrophe which was American involvement in the Middle East post 9/11. “If you are worried about innocent people being killed, as Rhodes claims to be, spare a thought for the millions of Iranians who face imprisonment, torture, or death if they dare deviate from the strict precepts of the Islamic Revolution.” I am in no way a moral relativist, and I revile state led religious extremism, with Islamism being, unfortunately , at the forefront of some of the most vile human rights abuses in modern history. This being said, this is exactly the type of slop that was shoveled into American’s heads from the Bush administration in partially justifying militarily involvement in the Middle East, framing it as a global struggle for freedom, liberation, especially that of the women in Iraq and Afghanistan (https://naapr.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/saving_muslim_women-_feminism_u.s_policy_and_the_war_on_terror_-_university_of_san_francisco_usf.pdf). Unless you opt for a complete occupation, you cannot and will not externally end the human rights abuses that Iranian citizens face (I wrote a piece about the role of militarily occupations earlier this year for anyone interested) and suggesting so is a slap in the face to the Iranian civilians which have already and will continue to suffer under Israeli bombs. The question for you is how morally culpable is a civilian population, especially a suppressed one like in Iran, to the actions of its government. Further, I think there is one other line of reasoning which connects the current conflict with Iran and American justification for Iraq: how long has Iran supposedly been on the precipice of nuclear strength? I looked it up the other day, the first American report that Iran was approaching weapons grade uranium was 1989, I believe. 36 years and they still aren’t nuclear capable (unlike Israel, I should mention if your concern is staying within the boundaries of international law regarding nukes). To me, this smells of the justification in Iraq, supposed WMDs which were never found, and appeals to human rights abuses there. We must stop repeating history.
Andrew, this is only true if your perspective on history goes back only like 100 years. And plainly not true in many other countries outside of the western world today. A generations worth of trauma from WWII held us back and rightfully so. Throughout history, lasting change has only occurred through regime change and the total capitulation of the aggressive tyrant. This only hits home when the tyrant hits your home. They don’t care if you don’t fight back.
This has been Europe’s experience with tyrants throughout its history and it’s what they face again today if not dealt with.
When you wage wars to liberate people from tyrants rather than to conquer land, you can focus on the tyrant. If Assad can fall in a matter of weeks to a targeted, swift movement that left his chemical weapons useless, so too will Khamenei. Sooner rather than later I would bet.
Iran will always project strength to hide weakness. Tyranny depends on total state control. They can never be seen as weak. We won’t know exactly when Iran’s regime will collapse until it’s imminently upon us. What we do know is that the conditions are now perfect for that to happen.
Gary Gary, you’ve lost a step if you don’t see this as a desperate deflection move by Netanyahu.
This will not change the dynamics at all. It’s the same old story and really just Netanyahu attempting to distract from his failures. Israel claims they are stopping Iran from developing a Nuke and strikes a few targets, and Iran strikes back and then it’s over. Rinse and Repeat.
Netanyahu (and you) thinks bombing Iran will get the Iranian people to turn on the regime because they are being bombed by Israel? That’s delusional.
Uh...Did we read the same article? Garry specifically says, "I am not going to pretend that what comes next for Iranians will be easy. Anyone who suggests that forty-six years of theocratic dictatorship will be replaced by Swedish social democracy overnight is not being honest with you."
That hardly sounds like he believes the dynamic will change, much less that he thinks that "Netanyahu...thinks bombing Iran will get the Iranian people to turn on the regime because they are being bombed by Israel..."
And to be accurate, it is less a deflection than a continuation of Netanyahu's desperation to remain in office. Keep in mind that ~80% of Israelis want him gone. But as long as the country is actively involved in a war or other military action, a Prime Minister cannot be removed. THIS is what Netanyahu is counting on with (i) the continued war ostensibly against Hamas, but actually against Gaza in toto; and (ii) the attack on Iran, and the expected response.
We apparently "got" two very different things from Garry's piece. Perhaps we each simply "read" it the way we WANTED to.
Seems pretty clear to me, he thinks these attacks changed something in the dynamic. Here is a clear example:
“Now that the Islamic Republic is severely weakened, the alarmist foreign policy commentariat is apprising us of the unacceptable risks, raising their well-worn red flags (or should I say, white flags?).”
What you fail to take into account is that Iran has been increasingly weakened over a fairly long period of time, so it was already weakened by the time of the Israeli attack (which is one reason why the attack took place when it did).
So how do YOU read "unacceptable risks," "well-worn red flags" and "white flags?" What do YOU think he means by this?
There is an infuriating bubble that has to be popped for people to finally realize that autocratic countries can’t just stay invincible forever in an onslaught by the free world. It just takes conviction.
The fall of Assad should have burst that bubble in the west. He ruled the same was as Khamenei. Brutally.
He fell from power from a swift, targeted campaign aimed directly at him, by a pre-established group ready to take control. His own people let these rebels right through the city to the palace gates. He had all the weapons still, he just couldn’t use them. It’s still a messy situation for the Syrian people and the future ahead won’t be easy. It was made possible by Israel crushing Assad’s ally: Hezbollah.
it can be both deflection and desperation for bebe.
there was no chance to witness if trump's many crimes\trials could be un-paused , had he not gotten re-elected. his minority cult in fact signaled to go 100X .
is this kind of escalation echoed in gazacide->iran ?
- you said Netanyahu is more desperate than deflectionary, but i am saying can be substantially both.
- both trump and Netanyahu face trials for crimes of many flavors, and both have successfully delayed them to stay or get back into power. this speaks to the desperation argument. had they not achieved their current role, we may have had a chance to see prosecutions and verdicts.
- in the case of trump, a number of very serious cases have actually been completely dropped since returning to power.
this was a signal to him that the voters are granting him even greater leeway for criminal conduct, with the backing of his scotus panel and majorities in congress. so everything is escalatory, be it political and\or for personal gain wealth.
- possibly same for Netanyahu. he was cheered on for gaza genocide, killing aid workers, and implementing starvation, so why not ratchet up and battle iran? he deflects every issue under justification of security\survival.
must add, this Netanyahu grand strategy is from the same person unable to prevent a primitive hamas attack. rather than being his shame, its his greatest justifier.
putin loves iran.
trump loves putin and bebe.
bebe hates iran.
this is not 'my enemies' enemy' , its the result of no substance from trump (and effectively the gop) on any issue.
Agreed. Netanyahu allowed that attack to go on for hours to maximize the effect so he can do what he’s doing now in Gaza, but it’s starting to backfire as the world watches the injustice. He would like you to think October 7th will be some kind of day of remembrance, but no one is going to remember it now.
And not to mention the fact that Trump was essentially trying to bring back Obama’s same plan that actually was working to keep Iran from developing a Nuke to begin with, which demonstrates Trump is completely out of his depth and has no plan other than what Bibi tells him.
If Bibi is bossing Trump around, he might as well command him to take on the brunt of the regional conflict and destroy Israel's enemies once and for all without risking another Israeli life.
Nobody is waiting for the ppl to raise up. Israel not Netanyahu alone need to put the risk at rest. Destroying the infrastructure will delay and possible stop the progress of Iran nuclear arsenal and weaken the proxies causing harm. Israel and Ukraine are the only thing left between the authoritarian forces over western civilization. The time to talk is over. I don’t like Netanyahu, still can agree that is Iran and Putins Russia wins we, I mean western civilization as we know it, will be gone
Israel does not deserve to be part of Western Civilization if they don’t support democracy.
And western civilization is itself standing in the way of itself by supporting what Israel is doing defending an Ethno-Fascist State and a National Socialist (yes I’m calling Netanyahu and his government Nazi’s) administration’s lies and justifications for clear genocide.
Bombing Iran was not pre-emptive of anything, it’s just a useful distraction.
Whatever man. Israel has its own problem. Its gov is a hybrid democracy like Hungary and USA, Poland. Still they are a better option than being under Putin, Russia, Iran or North Korea. Choose your battles. Nothing is black and white.
I chose my battle on October 7th 2023, when it was clear Netanyahu could have stopped what happened and didn’t because he’s nothing but a Jewish Hitler.
And I say that as someone who has family there and a Grahdfsther that had to flee Nazi Germany. If my people had had weapons (even old weapons and makeshift bombs) in 1933 Germany, it would look like what’s been going on in Gaza for the last 20 years.
War can clearly change circumstances in massive, quick, and/or unpredictable ways. It just happened in Syria last year for example.
This attack by Israel may be one of the times in which more war brings positive benefits. Iran was already weakened by Israel smashing its proxies, it’s loathed by its neighbors, and its drones kill Ukrainians every night. The Iranian government is an enemy of the US and ally of Putin so hurting Iran is often helpful.
And Netanyahu mostly takes the short-sighted and immoral choice. Support Hamas to weaken the PLO - check. Expand illegal settlements - check. Avoid a hostage deal in order to keep fighting in Gaza - check. Continue fighting in Lebanon even after destroying Hezbollah leadership - check. Kill the Oct 7 attack’s leaders and continue to bomb children - check.
All these aim to ensure Palestinians never have a state which is both immoral and short sighted because it means Israel will always be at war. So with the attack on Iran I am cautious about hoping when I don’t trust Israel’s goals.
As I told a fellow traveler yesterday - to his great shock and consternation - I have never seen Iran as NEARLY the existential (much less real) danger to the Middle East (much less the world) that so many others do.
As a preface, we can blame the current situation on Trump, for ending the nuclear deal that was successful in keeping Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons. But set that aside.
It takes a LOT of time to obtain and process the materials for a nuclear weapon, even more time to build the weapon, and even MORE time before it can be used. And it takes even MORE time to actually build up an arsenal of such weapons. Thus, even if Iran began in earnest today, it would take a minimum of three to five years (and probably longer) for them to have actual "nuclear strike capability."
But then the question arises: even if they HAD nukes, what makes anyone think that Iran would automatically turn them on Israel? Or that the other Arab states - no matter their commonalities with Iran - would necessarily support such a move? Don't forget - the fallout from a nuclear strike on Israel would waft into the surrounding Arab countries, harming and/or killing hundreds, thousands, possibly millions of Arabs. I also think that Iran is aware of this, despite their animosity toward Israel.
Finally, there is the U.S. question. Iran has to be aware that if it ever actually launched a nuclear weapon into Israel, not only does Israel have its own counter-nukes (assuming it ha time to launch them), but the U.S. would quickly turn Iran into a parking lot. Again, Iran cannot be unaware of this possibility.
No, nukes is not what concerns me - or should concern anyone - about Iran. It is their support of multiple "terrorist" organizations that DO launch small, mostly ineffective strikes against Israel and Israelis. In this regard, Hamas "got lucky" in its 10/7 strike, because Israel has been so fractured politically over Netanyahu and the authoritarian road he wants to take Israel down that they were not paying close enough attention.
I do not think any continued conflagration between Israel and Iran is going to amount to much, either in the "small picture" (as Garry notes, Iran is not all of a sudden going to become a constitutional democracy; and Iran is not going to "destroy" Israel) or in the "big picture" (i.e., this is not going to cause WWIII or any significant re-alignment of nations - except possibly causing SOME anti-Iranian sentiment in other Arab nations).
None of this is to say that I approve of Netanyahu's pre-emptive strike, which I think was at best unnecessary, and at worst plain stupid. But I have to agree with Garry's overall sentiment here (sometimes spoken, sometimes not) that the current situation is not going to have much effect, either locally or globally, though we will obviously have to now keep a slightly more active eye out in the region.
Well said by a first hand witness. I’m not able to agree or disagree with Mr. K at this time. I need to do more independent research. A responsibility I embrace energetically and enthusiasm. As for the moment I feel straight jacketed by the politics of expediency practiced by the forever in survival mode left on one hand and by the politics of greed and fundamentalist religion practiced by the ascendant right on the other. I’d like if I could to call down a pox on both their houses but both their “houses” but the reality is that we all of us live together in one house (to extend my metaphor). There is No Exit as Sartre averred. The cynic in me wants to say that this condition is by design. One that serve and sustain both “houses”. I’m a Democrat. More precisely a Wanna Be Democrat. As such I want new, fresh, strong, courageous, Democratic leadership. And I want it NOW before it’s too late. … Don, a new Next Move subscriber.
Good, incisive article. There was also already an ongoing threat from Iran of political assassination against former administration officials here in America like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo.
Gary, how much of Putin's 3 legged chair (Iran, North Korea, and China) which supports his war on Ukraine has been toppled by Israel's attack on Iran? What will be the impact of this war between Israel and Iran have on the future of the war in Ukraine?
Much, Ukraine help Israel and the west by getting rid of Russia and Iran influence over Syria and damaging the forces that helped hezbolla. Would be naive to think that this will not affect china, Russia and North Korea directly
The ideal but most difficult outcome: a Persian Spring that deposes the Ayatollah regime. Most of the other options including the Iraq War option could well make Vietnam & Afghanistan look like a picnic, given Iran is bigger & stronger than Iraq under Saddam. Especially if Trump breaks his own America First pledge of "no more forever wars".
I am reminded of that photo of Obama after Russia's first (recent) invasion of Ukraine in 2013(?) looking down at Putin with a severe expression, while Putin, not disconcerted in the least, tries not to smirk. Yeah, Obama, Putin's not going to care by a glare without action. Hillary Clinton would have known better.
Your piece is a forceful challenge to the status quo mindset in foreign policy, but it risks underestimating the unpredictable consequences of military escalation and regime collapse.
There are unlimited reasons to avoid confronting oppression. The slow grind of thug totalitarianism is ever on the move. We have lost the idealism of President Kennedy who noted we would bear any burden to assure the survival and success of liberty.
“If you are worried about innocent people being killed, as Rhodes claims to be, spare a thought for the millions of Iranians who face imprisonment, torture, or death if they dare deviate from the strict precepts of the Islamic Revolution. Or the hundreds of thousands of Syrians whose murder Iran was an accomplice to. Or the Ukrainian civilians who have found themselves on the receiving end of over 8,000 Iranian-made suicide drones over the past three years. Or scores of Argentinian Jews blown up in a Buenos Aires synagogue without even the thinnest of martial pretexts.”
Thank you Mr. Kasparov for having a spine. The fact that the USA is not leading the charge to take down Iran’s nuclear weapons program is surprising to me. I smell timidity—an abdication of duty to safeguard the world. Thank you, Israel, for fulfilling God’s purposes in the punishment of nations. Iranian dissidents who advocated for the God given rights of man, who were hunted for their lives for opposing the brutality of the Islamic Republic—these are now celebrating. Thank you, again, Israel.
Kasparov, as a Ukrainian-American I am a fan of both your political work and your illustrious career, but one specific line from this piece echoes the sentiments, in my view, that directly led to the catastrophe which was American involvement in the Middle East post 9/11. “If you are worried about innocent people being killed, as Rhodes claims to be, spare a thought for the millions of Iranians who face imprisonment, torture, or death if they dare deviate from the strict precepts of the Islamic Revolution.” I am in no way a moral relativist, and I revile state led religious extremism, with Islamism being, unfortunately , at the forefront of some of the most vile human rights abuses in modern history. This being said, this is exactly the type of slop that was shoveled into American’s heads from the Bush administration in partially justifying militarily involvement in the Middle East, framing it as a global struggle for freedom, liberation, especially that of the women in Iraq and Afghanistan (https://naapr.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/saving_muslim_women-_feminism_u.s_policy_and_the_war_on_terror_-_university_of_san_francisco_usf.pdf). Unless you opt for a complete occupation, you cannot and will not externally end the human rights abuses that Iranian citizens face (I wrote a piece about the role of militarily occupations earlier this year for anyone interested) and suggesting so is a slap in the face to the Iranian civilians which have already and will continue to suffer under Israeli bombs. The question for you is how morally culpable is a civilian population, especially a suppressed one like in Iran, to the actions of its government. Further, I think there is one other line of reasoning which connects the current conflict with Iran and American justification for Iraq: how long has Iran supposedly been on the precipice of nuclear strength? I looked it up the other day, the first American report that Iran was approaching weapons grade uranium was 1989, I believe. 36 years and they still aren’t nuclear capable (unlike Israel, I should mention if your concern is staying within the boundaries of international law regarding nukes). To me, this smells of the justification in Iraq, supposed WMDs which were never found, and appeals to human rights abuses there. We must stop repeating history.
Andrew, this is only true if your perspective on history goes back only like 100 years. And plainly not true in many other countries outside of the western world today. A generations worth of trauma from WWII held us back and rightfully so. Throughout history, lasting change has only occurred through regime change and the total capitulation of the aggressive tyrant. This only hits home when the tyrant hits your home. They don’t care if you don’t fight back.
This has been Europe’s experience with tyrants throughout its history and it’s what they face again today if not dealt with.
When you wage wars to liberate people from tyrants rather than to conquer land, you can focus on the tyrant. If Assad can fall in a matter of weeks to a targeted, swift movement that left his chemical weapons useless, so too will Khamenei. Sooner rather than later I would bet.
Iran will always project strength to hide weakness. Tyranny depends on total state control. They can never be seen as weak. We won’t know exactly when Iran’s regime will collapse until it’s imminently upon us. What we do know is that the conditions are now perfect for that to happen.
Gary Gary, you’ve lost a step if you don’t see this as a desperate deflection move by Netanyahu.
This will not change the dynamics at all. It’s the same old story and really just Netanyahu attempting to distract from his failures. Israel claims they are stopping Iran from developing a Nuke and strikes a few targets, and Iran strikes back and then it’s over. Rinse and Repeat.
Netanyahu (and you) thinks bombing Iran will get the Iranian people to turn on the regime because they are being bombed by Israel? That’s delusional.
Uh...Did we read the same article? Garry specifically says, "I am not going to pretend that what comes next for Iranians will be easy. Anyone who suggests that forty-six years of theocratic dictatorship will be replaced by Swedish social democracy overnight is not being honest with you."
That hardly sounds like he believes the dynamic will change, much less that he thinks that "Netanyahu...thinks bombing Iran will get the Iranian people to turn on the regime because they are being bombed by Israel..."
And to be accurate, it is less a deflection than a continuation of Netanyahu's desperation to remain in office. Keep in mind that ~80% of Israelis want him gone. But as long as the country is actively involved in a war or other military action, a Prime Minister cannot be removed. THIS is what Netanyahu is counting on with (i) the continued war ostensibly against Hamas, but actually against Gaza in toto; and (ii) the attack on Iran, and the expected response.
We apparently "got" two very different things from Garry's piece. Perhaps we each simply "read" it the way we WANTED to.
What comes next? He’s implying that what is going on is going to change the dynamics inside of Iran. I’m here to tell you it’s not.
As per my reply to you above, I do not read it that way. You are free to take from it what you want. But that is NOT what he is saying.
Seems pretty clear to me, he thinks these attacks changed something in the dynamic. Here is a clear example:
“Now that the Islamic Republic is severely weakened, the alarmist foreign policy commentariat is apprising us of the unacceptable risks, raising their well-worn red flags (or should I say, white flags?).”
What you fail to take into account is that Iran has been increasingly weakened over a fairly long period of time, so it was already weakened by the time of the Israeli attack (which is one reason why the attack took place when it did).
So how do YOU read "unacceptable risks," "well-worn red flags" and "white flags?" What do YOU think he means by this?
There is an infuriating bubble that has to be popped for people to finally realize that autocratic countries can’t just stay invincible forever in an onslaught by the free world. It just takes conviction.
The fall of Assad should have burst that bubble in the west. He ruled the same was as Khamenei. Brutally.
He fell from power from a swift, targeted campaign aimed directly at him, by a pre-established group ready to take control. His own people let these rebels right through the city to the palace gates. He had all the weapons still, he just couldn’t use them. It’s still a messy situation for the Syrian people and the future ahead won’t be easy. It was made possible by Israel crushing Assad’s ally: Hezbollah.
That’s what I think Garry means. Could be wrong!
it can be both deflection and desperation for bebe.
there was no chance to witness if trump's many crimes\trials could be un-paused , had he not gotten re-elected. his minority cult in fact signaled to go 100X .
is this kind of escalation echoed in gazacide->iran ?
Sorry. I do not understand the intent of your comment, or many of the phrases used. Can you clarify what you are saying?
will simplify.
- you said Netanyahu is more desperate than deflectionary, but i am saying can be substantially both.
- both trump and Netanyahu face trials for crimes of many flavors, and both have successfully delayed them to stay or get back into power. this speaks to the desperation argument. had they not achieved their current role, we may have had a chance to see prosecutions and verdicts.
- in the case of trump, a number of very serious cases have actually been completely dropped since returning to power.
this was a signal to him that the voters are granting him even greater leeway for criminal conduct, with the backing of his scotus panel and majorities in congress. so everything is escalatory, be it political and\or for personal gain wealth.
- possibly same for Netanyahu. he was cheered on for gaza genocide, killing aid workers, and implementing starvation, so why not ratchet up and battle iran? he deflects every issue under justification of security\survival.
Wit this comment, I agree 100%. And what a travesty.
must add, this Netanyahu grand strategy is from the same person unable to prevent a primitive hamas attack. rather than being his shame, its his greatest justifier.
putin loves iran.
trump loves putin and bebe.
bebe hates iran.
this is not 'my enemies' enemy' , its the result of no substance from trump (and effectively the gop) on any issue.
Agreed. Netanyahu allowed that attack to go on for hours to maximize the effect so he can do what he’s doing now in Gaza, but it’s starting to backfire as the world watches the injustice. He would like you to think October 7th will be some kind of day of remembrance, but no one is going to remember it now.
And not to mention the fact that Trump was essentially trying to bring back Obama’s same plan that actually was working to keep Iran from developing a Nuke to begin with, which demonstrates Trump is completely out of his depth and has no plan other than what Bibi tells him.
If Bibi is bossing Trump around, he might as well command him to take on the brunt of the regional conflict and destroy Israel's enemies once and for all without risking another Israeli life.
Nobody is waiting for the ppl to raise up. Israel not Netanyahu alone need to put the risk at rest. Destroying the infrastructure will delay and possible stop the progress of Iran nuclear arsenal and weaken the proxies causing harm. Israel and Ukraine are the only thing left between the authoritarian forces over western civilization. The time to talk is over. I don’t like Netanyahu, still can agree that is Iran and Putins Russia wins we, I mean western civilization as we know it, will be gone
Israel does not deserve to be part of Western Civilization if they don’t support democracy.
And western civilization is itself standing in the way of itself by supporting what Israel is doing defending an Ethno-Fascist State and a National Socialist (yes I’m calling Netanyahu and his government Nazi’s) administration’s lies and justifications for clear genocide.
Bombing Iran was not pre-emptive of anything, it’s just a useful distraction.
Whatever man. Israel has its own problem. Its gov is a hybrid democracy like Hungary and USA, Poland. Still they are a better option than being under Putin, Russia, Iran or North Korea. Choose your battles. Nothing is black and white.
I chose my battle on October 7th 2023, when it was clear Netanyahu could have stopped what happened and didn’t because he’s nothing but a Jewish Hitler.
And I say that as someone who has family there and a Grahdfsther that had to flee Nazi Germany. If my people had had weapons (even old weapons and makeshift bombs) in 1933 Germany, it would look like what’s been going on in Gaza for the last 20 years.
War can clearly change circumstances in massive, quick, and/or unpredictable ways. It just happened in Syria last year for example.
This attack by Israel may be one of the times in which more war brings positive benefits. Iran was already weakened by Israel smashing its proxies, it’s loathed by its neighbors, and its drones kill Ukrainians every night. The Iranian government is an enemy of the US and ally of Putin so hurting Iran is often helpful.
And Netanyahu mostly takes the short-sighted and immoral choice. Support Hamas to weaken the PLO - check. Expand illegal settlements - check. Avoid a hostage deal in order to keep fighting in Gaza - check. Continue fighting in Lebanon even after destroying Hezbollah leadership - check. Kill the Oct 7 attack’s leaders and continue to bomb children - check.
All these aim to ensure Palestinians never have a state which is both immoral and short sighted because it means Israel will always be at war. So with the attack on Iran I am cautious about hoping when I don’t trust Israel’s goals.
As I told a fellow traveler yesterday - to his great shock and consternation - I have never seen Iran as NEARLY the existential (much less real) danger to the Middle East (much less the world) that so many others do.
As a preface, we can blame the current situation on Trump, for ending the nuclear deal that was successful in keeping Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons. But set that aside.
It takes a LOT of time to obtain and process the materials for a nuclear weapon, even more time to build the weapon, and even MORE time before it can be used. And it takes even MORE time to actually build up an arsenal of such weapons. Thus, even if Iran began in earnest today, it would take a minimum of three to five years (and probably longer) for them to have actual "nuclear strike capability."
But then the question arises: even if they HAD nukes, what makes anyone think that Iran would automatically turn them on Israel? Or that the other Arab states - no matter their commonalities with Iran - would necessarily support such a move? Don't forget - the fallout from a nuclear strike on Israel would waft into the surrounding Arab countries, harming and/or killing hundreds, thousands, possibly millions of Arabs. I also think that Iran is aware of this, despite their animosity toward Israel.
Finally, there is the U.S. question. Iran has to be aware that if it ever actually launched a nuclear weapon into Israel, not only does Israel have its own counter-nukes (assuming it ha time to launch them), but the U.S. would quickly turn Iran into a parking lot. Again, Iran cannot be unaware of this possibility.
No, nukes is not what concerns me - or should concern anyone - about Iran. It is their support of multiple "terrorist" organizations that DO launch small, mostly ineffective strikes against Israel and Israelis. In this regard, Hamas "got lucky" in its 10/7 strike, because Israel has been so fractured politically over Netanyahu and the authoritarian road he wants to take Israel down that they were not paying close enough attention.
I do not think any continued conflagration between Israel and Iran is going to amount to much, either in the "small picture" (as Garry notes, Iran is not all of a sudden going to become a constitutional democracy; and Iran is not going to "destroy" Israel) or in the "big picture" (i.e., this is not going to cause WWIII or any significant re-alignment of nations - except possibly causing SOME anti-Iranian sentiment in other Arab nations).
None of this is to say that I approve of Netanyahu's pre-emptive strike, which I think was at best unnecessary, and at worst plain stupid. But I have to agree with Garry's overall sentiment here (sometimes spoken, sometimes not) that the current situation is not going to have much effect, either locally or globally, though we will obviously have to now keep a slightly more active eye out in the region.
Well said by a first hand witness. I’m not able to agree or disagree with Mr. K at this time. I need to do more independent research. A responsibility I embrace energetically and enthusiasm. As for the moment I feel straight jacketed by the politics of expediency practiced by the forever in survival mode left on one hand and by the politics of greed and fundamentalist religion practiced by the ascendant right on the other. I’d like if I could to call down a pox on both their houses but both their “houses” but the reality is that we all of us live together in one house (to extend my metaphor). There is No Exit as Sartre averred. The cynic in me wants to say that this condition is by design. One that serve and sustain both “houses”. I’m a Democrat. More precisely a Wanna Be Democrat. As such I want new, fresh, strong, courageous, Democratic leadership. And I want it NOW before it’s too late. … Don, a new Next Move subscriber.
Good, incisive article. There was also already an ongoing threat from Iran of political assassination against former administration officials here in America like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo.
Gary, how much of Putin's 3 legged chair (Iran, North Korea, and China) which supports his war on Ukraine has been toppled by Israel's attack on Iran? What will be the impact of this war between Israel and Iran have on the future of the war in Ukraine?
Much, Ukraine help Israel and the west by getting rid of Russia and Iran influence over Syria and damaging the forces that helped hezbolla. Would be naive to think that this will not affect china, Russia and North Korea directly
The ideal but most difficult outcome: a Persian Spring that deposes the Ayatollah regime. Most of the other options including the Iraq War option could well make Vietnam & Afghanistan look like a picnic, given Iran is bigger & stronger than Iraq under Saddam. Especially if Trump breaks his own America First pledge of "no more forever wars".
I am reminded of that photo of Obama after Russia's first (recent) invasion of Ukraine in 2013(?) looking down at Putin with a severe expression, while Putin, not disconcerted in the least, tries not to smirk. Yeah, Obama, Putin's not going to care by a glare without action. Hillary Clinton would have known better.
Thats a GOOD thing. The way liberals play victim all day, we can all agree that things need to change.
Your piece is a forceful challenge to the status quo mindset in foreign policy, but it risks underestimating the unpredictable consequences of military escalation and regime collapse.
There are unlimited reasons to avoid confronting oppression. The slow grind of thug totalitarianism is ever on the move. We have lost the idealism of President Kennedy who noted we would bear any burden to assure the survival and success of liberty.
This is a great Paragraph!
“If you are worried about innocent people being killed, as Rhodes claims to be, spare a thought for the millions of Iranians who face imprisonment, torture, or death if they dare deviate from the strict precepts of the Islamic Revolution. Or the hundreds of thousands of Syrians whose murder Iran was an accomplice to. Or the Ukrainian civilians who have found themselves on the receiving end of over 8,000 Iranian-made suicide drones over the past three years. Or scores of Argentinian Jews blown up in a Buenos Aires synagogue without even the thinnest of martial pretexts.”
The collapse of FIAT Currencies may yield a more liberal Iran.
Thank you Mr. Kasparov for having a spine. The fact that the USA is not leading the charge to take down Iran’s nuclear weapons program is surprising to me. I smell timidity—an abdication of duty to safeguard the world. Thank you, Israel, for fulfilling God’s purposes in the punishment of nations. Iranian dissidents who advocated for the God given rights of man, who were hunted for their lives for opposing the brutality of the Islamic Republic—these are now celebrating. Thank you, again, Israel.
Excellent article.