Iranian Regime’s Fourfold Objectives in the Gaza Crisis

gaza bombardment november 2023
Written by
Mahmoud Hakamian

Irrespective of why and how the current Gaza conflict started, its far-reaching complications have not been serving those in Gaza. All major players in this strategic equation know very well that the Iranian regime’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is pulling the strings, despite his regime’s calls for de-escalation. While the how for Khamenei’s strategic gamble is most certainly common knowledge, the why begs for contemplating and immediate action.

On the national level, Khamenei aims to obstruct the path of Iran’s imminent revolution by exploiting the domestic and international focus on the Middle East crisis to eradicate dissent through increased executions, repressive laws, and enhanced domestic security measures.

Politically, Khamenei seeks to employ a conflict in the Middle East to quell internal feuds and consolidate power, thereby preparing for the upcoming elections of the Parliament and the Assembly of Experts. The latter holds particular political significance as it pertains to the potential successor of the regime’s Supreme Leader.

On a regional scale, Khamenei aims to exert pressure on Arab countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, compelling them to distance themselves from the Abraham Accords, which had posed a significant challenge to his regime’s standing in the Middle East.

Internationally, he seeks to elevate himself to a hegemonic spot, asserting dominance and positioning his regime as a major power capable of confronting a United States that is already facing a multitude of challenges in the upcoming election year.

Khamenei’s extensive Twitter activity on October 3rd, just four days prior to the attacks, and the continuous stream of assertive statements from Iranian state and military officials, despite the ongoing turmoil in the Gaza crisis and the potential risks involved, were not without purpose. He was confident because he had employed a similar strategy in the 33-day war between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006, as well as in subsequent confrontations where Tehran-backed militias caused turmoil in the Middle East, all without facing consequences.

The Iranian regime’s Minister of Defense blatantly issued a stark warning to the US, urging an immediate halt to the Gaza war and the enforcement of a ceasefire, or face a significant retaliatory strike. Even elements from previously defeated factions, who had not supported Khamenei during the 2022 uprising, now rally behind his adventurism and compete in praising the regime’s proxy militants abroad.

Despite this bold rhetoric, Khamenei and the regime have no intention of going to war with the United States or Israel. Having governed the country for the past four decades, they are acutely aware of the Iranian people’s sentiments towards their regime and regional pursuits. They understand that a direct confrontation would severely damage their regional standing, if not jeopardize their entire rule.

At the peak of political tensions with the US during Donald Trump’s presidency, on August 13, 2018, Khamenei conveyed to a gathering of loyal followers, “In short, to the Iranian people: there will be no war, and we will not negotiate. Why? Because war involves two sides: we, who do not initiate conflict, and the Americans, who also refrain from starting a war as they know it would be entirely to their disadvantage. Americans once attacked us in Tabas [referring to a military operation by US forces to rescue American hostages in 1981], and retreated! There will be no war, without a doubt.”

Khamenei’s confidence in Western inaction stems from four decades of an official policy of appeasement, swinging between “critical dialogue” and “constructive dialogue.” Ignoring the regime’s increased oil sales and succumbing to its hostage-taking strategy has only strengthened Khamenei’s belief that everything is tolerated as long as he can walk the fine line of no direct confrontation.

He perfectly knows that a strong tendency in the West has political and economic stakes in cowing toward dictators and will root for maintaining this disastrous doctrine under the pretext of avoiding war.

Championing a “no war” policy, the terrorist regime in Iran now seeks an alleged “de-escalation,” confident that the West’s failure to hold them accountable allows them to claim victory in a major regional conflict, disrupting alliances that were previously working towards their isolation.

 

Pleading with the terrorist regime in Iran to rein in its proxy militia groups only plays into Khamenei’s strategy, effectively acknowledging the status he has aggressively pursued. Rather than treating his regime as part of the solution, the world should officially declare that Tehran is the primary problem and will be addressed accordingly.

While it’s certain that post-World War I statecraft contributed to the outbreak of World War II by appeasing dictators, the current situation in Iran differs. The regime there, albeit similarly thirsty for hegemony, is facing significant internal challenges from an oppressed nation that is actively resisting it despite the brutal consequences.

The regime is struggling to fight, eliminate, and plot against an organized Resistance movement that has survived genocides, international crackdowns, and geographical displacement, striking Tehran’s regime at various levels—intelligence, military, and political.

Over the past five years, the people of Iran have consistently demonstrated courage and determination in their efforts to overthrow the oppressive regime led by Khamenei. Their protests, both regional and nationwide, as well as nightly endeavors and occasional skirmishes, showcase their unwavering commitment to put an end to tyranny, despite the associated risks.

Rather than oscillating between war and appeasement, a cycle that historically leads to more conflict and bloodshed, the world should demonstrate its rejection of the regime’s threatening agendas.

By acknowledging that all the regime’s oppressive entities, e.g. the IRGC and Ministry of Intelligence, are nothing more than terrorizing apparatuses, the international community can once again forge an alliance in showing the people of Iran that their struggle is a historic turning point for a safer and more peaceful world.

Back to top button