3 Western narratives boosting democratic suicide
1. “The war is taking longer than expected. Iran is gaining the upper hand – the US and Israel have no strategy.”
Comfortably distant observers may consume it like a Hollywood-movie, but wars do not have a script. They have strategic goals. Militarily pursued in dynamic, dangerous and often asymmetric environments.
Is Iran gaining the upper hand as the Economist declared in its cover story on March 26th? Of course not. In the past four weeks, over 250 of the most dangerous leaders of the Iranian terror regime were eliminated. Important components of the scientific and military infrastructure fueling Iran’s nuclear ambitions were destroyed. The navy was massively harmed. Seventy percent of the rocket launchers have been taken out of action. A significant part of the regime’s missile arsenal was destroyed. Missiles designed to carry nuclear warheads. Missiles that – as Iran’s attacks against Cyprus and the US-UK Diego Garcia base demonstrated – already reach Berlin, Paris, and London.
Already in 2018, Ali Akbar Salehi, Head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization warned Europe of “a terrifying future with no security on a scale that has not been seen yet” if they did not give in to the regime’s demands. In other words: rather than staring at the clock with Schadenfreude, Western media and their consumers should celebrate every single Iranian rocket launcher destroyed by Israel and the US. The US and Israel are currently ensuring that children in Berlin and Paris do not have to go through what Israeli kids are: “celebrate” Eastern in bomb shelters. In fear of death rather than celebrating freedom during Passover.
2. “Instead of changing the regime, this war radicalizes the Mullahs.”
This myth is a recycled version of the post-October 7 obsession by some Western media claiming that Israel’s self-defense against Hamas – following the massacre of 1200 Israelis, kidnapping of 251 including children, women and Holocaust survivors, and missile attacks all over the country – would create more terrorists. It is the kind of logic only the ideologically blinded can follow. Should the allied forces not have bombed Dresden and Berlin, to avoid the risk of making the Nazis more dangerous?
To their defense: historic context is a lousy argument for those taking moral shelter in the Tik-Tok-inspired “here and now”. So: what is the radical superlative to slaughtering 40,000 young Iranians protesting for their freedom. Hanging homosexuals. Stoning women. Persecuting Bahais, Christians and other minorities. Executing minors. Raping imprisoned girls before they execute them as killing virgins is not allowed in Islam? Is there more radical than that?
Regime change remains the desired outcome of this war, for the Iranian people first and foremost. The US and Israeli armies are currently creating the conditions to ensure that when the brave Iranian people take to the street again, it does not imply certain death. Reza Pahlavi, the Shah’s son and possible next transitional leader of Iran, still tells the people to wait in there homes, and take to the streets only when time is ripe. This is pragmatism defeating fundamentalism. It is the beginning of the end of the Mullah regime.
3. “This war breaches international law”
Two states are separated by a wall. One state threatens to conquer the other. It begins building towers on its side of the wall, placing cannons and soldiers on them. It also starts constructing a super-cannon.
When the threatened state destroys the towers, cannons, and the super-cannon while they are still being built, Europeans accuse it of violating international law. Moral of the story: Damned is the Free World if international law is turned into a protective shield for authoritarian and fundamentalist regimes.
International law is important, but it is a lousy survival strategy – especially for democratic countries. International law did not protect Israel from the plethora of missile and state-sponsored terrorist attacks over the past decades. Try to explain to Israeli children that they will need to spend the rest of their lives in proximity to bunkers, will never be able to go to school for more than few weeks at a time, and never sleep, shower or play calmly again – because the most dangerous regime in the world, which stands behind every single front attacking Israel, is immune to Israel’s self-defense. Protected by the international law.
Using the “international law” and “unrightful war” whip against the USA and Israel, as Germany’s President did this week, European leaders are committing a strategic own-goal history will remember. Not only does it strengthen the Mullahs who just last week attacked Europe with ballistic missiles and who have been operating terrorist cells, terror-financing and radicalizing mechanisms in Germany for decades. It further reveals a dangerous pattern of randomness and double standard: the quote stems from the same German president who congratulated the Mullahs to the terrorist regime’s 40th anniversary. Who whole-heartedly greeted Russia’s Foreign Minister Lavrov at the Munich Security Conference after Putin attacked the Krim. And who greeted Syria’s President alSharaa with a warm handshake in his Berlin castle this week. A former Jihadist whose Islamist gangs are committing massacres against Christian, Druze and Kurdish minorities in Syria.
The good news? These narratives and their tragic heroes have become entirely irrelevant. The Middle East is facing a historic window of opportunity, of ridding itself from the terrorism super-spreading Ayatollahs and their proxies. Pragmatic Arab countries are forging ties with Israel to benefit from close technological, innovation, economical and defence cooperation. Ironically, European leaders opt for capitulation – turning their back to a united front against the threats emerging from the Chaos-seeking axis. While countries like the UAE, Morrocco and Bahrein, chose pragmatism over ideology, European leaders – encouraged by narratives spread by left-leaning media – choose ideology over pragmatism. This is nothing less than democratic suicide.
