- 09:00
The Iranian revolutionary imaginary and its strategic projections are gradually coming to an end with the unraveling of the proxies tapestry, the destruction of its operational platforms and the debunking of its political mythologies. The conjunction of internal crises with the demise of the imperial dominion is no hazard; it’s the outcome of the discredited revolutionary narrative, the rejection of the dystopia and its ideological diktat, the bankrupted governance, the repudiation of bloody imperial inroads (the ongoing cases in Lebanon and Syria) and the end of a monumental delusion.
The Israeli counteroffensive is the main driver of this major strategic turnaround that lies at the origin of the new military and political dynamic that is resetting the coordinates of political mapping in the Middle East. While fighting for its survival, the State of Israel has questioned the very roots of this endemic instability and its geostrategic coordinates. Nothing is likely to be understood of the ongoing transformations unless we come to terms with the rationale and the subtexts of the Israeli counteroffensive. The limited security objectives, however critical, are overridden by larger geostrategic considerations that are reordering the political dynamics in the whole region.
The truce that was concluded in Lebanon is of a tactical purview unless Hezbollah realizes its limits and comes to terms with the emerging strategic equation. Otherwise, Israel has no other option but to finalize its destruction, and the Shiite community, which fully sided with Hezbollah’s political agenda, is bound to revise its ideological and strategic priorities and renounce the ongoing course and its deleterious fallouts. The latest reactions that succeeded the acting of truce are ominous and redolent of the same miscalculations and paranoid projections that have led to the current disasters. Lebanese Shiites have been accomplices of the subversion strategy, which allowed them to take over the country, plunder public resources, instrumentalize its leverages to promote organized crime, set a claim on state prerogatives and the basic rights of its citizenry and lead the Iranian politics of subversion regionwide.
Their sturdy denial of reality is hardwired to the state of moral callousness, political impunity and normalized delinquency, which has prevailed for decades and created this sense of trivialized arrogance. The military bludgeoning has rehabilitated the principle of reality and might serve as an alternative path to the actual doldrums. Diplomacy has no chances unless it reckons with the rising power equation and starts acting upon its political mandates. The truce proposals are effective as long as actors are ready to comply with their practical mandates and peace objectives. What’s worrying is the moral blindness of Hezbollah and its communal cohort at a time when nothing is left. Therefore, we have to be wary of their practical commitments and readiness to enforce the truce stipulations and their incidence on civil concord and political reconciliation in Lebanon. The persistent political jockeying is a bad omen.
The unraveling of the proxies tapestry sends us back to the masterminding coordinator, who has to cope with its fledgling legitimacy and downgraded abilities. The conventional saga of the Iranian imperialism rests upon a locked-up equation: the international normalization is tantamount to internal liberalization, and the whole Iranian diplomacy is based on managing the relationship between the two in order to forestall the synergistic dynamic between the two, prevent internal change and maintain the relational ambiguities with the international community. The Achilles heel of the Iranian regime lies at the intersection of ideological foreclosures, strategic dilemmas, oligarchic entrenchments, agonizing dystopia, bankrupt governance at all levels and a disenchanted citizenry.
While striving to create an international counter-order, the Iranian regime’s diplomacy is based on faked simulations, latent obstructionism and savage domestic repression. The Iranian regime’s double speak is meant to exorcise political change, outmaneuver international pressure and maintain minimal exchange with the liberal world community. Now that the two components of the Iranian subversion strategy are operating simultaneously, the conjunction between the two should be disrupted at both ends: the destruction of the operational platforms and the crushing of the nuclear program. The likelihood of a negotiated de-escalation at both the regional and domestic levels leaves Iran and NATO at odds and the probability of war more likely than ever.
Comments