The Unforeseen Consequences of Iranian Resistance

Another Iranian innovation is the retaliation Tehran has launched against its neighbors. Relying on international law and statements by Israeli and American leaders, Iran has attacked US military bases in the Gulf and the Levant. I am not referring here to the attacks by Lebanese Hezbollah (the Party of God) and Iraqi Saraya Awliya al-Dam (the Guardians of Blood Brigade), but solely to Iranian attacks.

Another Iranian innovation is the retaliation Tehran has launched against its neighbors. Invoking international law and statements by Israeli and American leaders, Iran has attacked US military bases in the Gulf and the Levant. I am not referring here to the attacks by Lebanese Hezbollah (the Party of God) and Iraqi Saraya Awliya al-Dam (the Guardians of Blood Brigade), but solely to the Iranian attacks.

To everyone’s astonishment, Iran reminded the West of Resolution 3314 (XXIX), dated December 14, 1974 [3]. Adopted without a vote by the United Nations General Assembly, it clarifies the concept of aggression to which the Charter of San Francisco refers. The international press, dominated by Anglo-Saxon media, has become convinced that international law prohibits entering the territory of another. It is on the basis of this prejudice that the General Assembly condemned the Russian special military operation in Ukraine. Iran has resurrected this forgotten text.

This text authorizes the use of force to assist “peoples subjected to colonial or racist regimes,” which is the case with Russian aid to the Donbas republics (Article 7). It prohibits not only aggression against Iran by Israel and the United States, but also third-party states hosting Israeli or US military bases participating in the aggression (Article 3) from doing the same. It follows that Iran has the right to retaliate against the territories of the Gulf States and the Levant.

We observe that these states are bewildered by the Iranian response and that their economies are paralyzed. Yet, these states, primarily those of the Gulf, are major oil producers. They are therefore trying to break free from Israel and the United States, which until now ensured their security but are now responsible for their misfortunes. If their desire for independence were to lead them to sell their oil not in US dollars, but in other currencies, the value of the dollar would collapse. Indeed, its value is not guaranteed by the US GDP, but by the international hydrocarbon market. During the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, we emphasized that the United States was not seeking to seize the country’s considerable oil reserves, but to re-establish oil trading in dollars. What succeeded in Venezuela could fail in the Middle East and trigger the beginning of the end for the United States.

What is happening today in the Middle East is suddenly inspiring all the states that complain about US domination, starting with China.

Beijing is preparing for a conflict with the United States and Japan over its region of Taiwan. It’s worth remembering that China has no intention of invading the island, but considers any attempt to grant it independence an act of aggression. From its perspective, Chiang Kai-shek had no right to secede, and Taiwan remains a Chinese region. The Kuomintang, Chiang Kai-shek’s successor party, agrees; only the very small Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of President Lai Ching-te seeks independence. This issue only arises because the United States is raising it.

Beijing has just realized that international law authorizes it, in the event of US aggression, to retaliate against US military bases in the Asia-Pacific region. In the blink of an eye, the People’s Liberation Army completely revised its plans [4]. It redirected its missiles, no longer toward Taiwan, but to target the 24 US military bases in the region.

This reversal is being followed by all the states hosting US military bases, which are now anticipating the troubles that the Gulf and Levant countries are enduring. Undoubtedly, they will soon reconsider their presence.

Beyond the Iranian conflict, it now appears that Iran’s model of resistance is compelling for all those who anticipate a military conflict with Washington and that it is revolutionizing the way we understand the balance of power.

It is important to understand that the United States has allowed itself to be manipulated by its own propaganda. It has convinced itself that the events following the collapse of the Ayandeh bank resulted in more than 40,000 victims, all attributable to the Revolutionary Guards. This is obviously grossly false. Most of the victims are attributable to ISIS attacks and the panic created by snipers positioned on rooftops, killing both protesters and police officers. As for their actual number, it is at least six times lower.

Similarly, they convinced themselves that all these protesters were “anti-regime,” assuming that those demanding the return of their bank deposits were necessarily against Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In doing so, they lumped together economic protesters, those opposed to religious totalitarianism, and those who aspired to be governed in the Western style. They are now discovering that one can be ruined by the banking system, resent the mullahs, be fascinated by American series broadcast in Persian by some forty Western television channels, and still defend one’s country.

This miscalculation, comparable to the one that led them to organize the departure of the shah, Reza Pahlavi, and the return of Imam Ruhollah Khomeini, led them to military defeat, or even to their own downfall.