How would you describe a nation which has had almost all of its navy and air force destroyed, most of its leadership assassinated, its military commanders killed, its air defence and radar sites taken out, along with many of its leading scientists, its ballistic missile stockpiles destroyed and over a thousand of its domestic and global terror commanders killed?
According to the likes of Lord Ricketts the word is victorious. Speaking this morning on the BBC, the former UK national security adviser informed us that, “Iran has come out stronger”. Is it any wonder we ended up with the Obama nuclear deal, which effectively allowed Iran to develop a bomb in secret while having sanctions lifted, and which led to the inevitability of military action to remove the Iranian threat, when this is the level of analysis we have had for so long?
To be fair to Lord Ricketts, he is far from alone in this. The narrative that “Iran is now more powerful, the US weakened” is now everywhere – and growing. It’s almost as if these people are gleeful that, as the TACO acronym has it (Trump always chickens out), the US did not follow through on the president’s threat to escalate the destruction of the regime’s infrastructure last night, as they can now portray him and the US as somehow defeated when in reality it’s clear that Trump's threat to destroy power plants and bridges forced the regime to take stock and concede a ceasefire that includes re-opening the Straits.
It’s a strange kind of victory for Iran, which has also had its proxy army Hamas reduced to rubble, seen the leadership of Hezbollah taken out, had its Syrian stooge Assad removed, had much of its economic infrastructure destroyed – and will more than likely now have to deal with an internal uprising that has been biding its time.
Much of the commentary today has taken Iran’s list of ten “demands” for a ceasefire as some kind of blueprint of a deal, rather than as the crazed propaganda that they are. Given that they include, “Ending the war against all components of the ‘Axis of Resistance,’" which Iran presents as an acknowledgement of the failure of Israeli military operations;
“Withdrawal of US combat forces from all bases and military deployment points in the region”; “Complete lifting of all primary and secondary sanctions imposed on Iran”; “Release of all frozen Iranian assets and funds abroad”; and a fee paid to Iran for traffic via the Straits of Hormuz, you need to be – let’s be blunt – a Grade A idiot to think that these ten points are the basis for anything. The fact that President Trump has said they are a starting point for negotiations does not, as the regime’s useful idiots would have it, mean they will form the basis of anything. If you think that Iran is going to receive a penny from anyone for using the Straits, then I have the proverbial bridge to sell you.
Rather than swallowing Iran’s propaganda, look instead at reality. For weeks the Iranians have seen the closure of the Straits to most shipping as its main weapon – with the idea that the pressure on Trump caused by the impact on markets would mean that he would be forced to halt military operations. The one thing Tehran did not want to do was re-open the Straits – the American pre-requisite for negotiations. On March 10, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, reportedly the regime’s true current leader, called the very idea of a temporary ceasefire to allow for negotiations a “trap”, as it would inevitably lead to the resumption of war. And what has now happened? Iran has agreed to re-open the Straits for a promise of a mere two-week halt to US operations for negotiations between parties so far apart they are far more likely to fail than succeed. Some “victory” for Iran that is.
The reality is that Iran has now agreed to open the Straits and stop attacking its neighbours for nothing more than the US promise to halt operations for two weeks, even though the regime had previously insisted it would accept only a permanent cessation and a deal that would bar any future US military operations. The only “achievement” of the regime – and it is not inconsiderable – is that it remains in charge of Iran. But the idea that this is guaranteed to last, and that the possibility of its collapse is no longer real, is merely an assertion.
None of this is to say that the opposite is true – that this has been a total triumph for the US. Most obviously, the regime remains in place – for now. It seems also that the US has not yet removed Iran’s full stockpile of uranium. And the upset to the world economy is dangerous and worrying.
But the military achievements in a matter of weeks are staggering. And, also contrary to much of the narrative now being asserted as fact, Iran’s response in attacking its neighbours – including those who had never been hostile, such as Qatar – has transformed the regional politics in favour of the US and Israel. As Anwar Gargash, the key adviser to the UAE president, put it in an interview with Bloomberg in recent days, Iran misjudged by attacking the UAE and other Gulf states, driving them closer to both the US and Israel.
“For countries that have relations with Israel, this relationship will be strengthened. For countries that don’t have relations, I expect that more channels will be opened...in this war, we are seeing how important the American connection is.”
Another Iranian victory, eh?
To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.