By Husam Dughman
The Middle East’s biggest modern disaster did not happen in 1948. It happened in 1979. A popular revolution overthrew the modernizing, secular Shah of Iran and replaced him with an atavistic theocracy. While some people living in the Shah’s Iran might have suffered from excessive human rights violations, the country was developing well, women had much freedom, and Iran was a fulcrum of stability in the region. All that ended in 1979.
The success of Iran’s Islamic revolution led to numerous cases of executions, imprisonment, torture, and the emergence of a reign of terror within Iran far worse than anything that had happened under the Shah. Personal freedom was stifled, women were crushed, and the economy was seriously weakened. It also led to the destabilization of the region. Not long after the revolution in Iran, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Although the Soviets had for some time been reluctant to intervene militarily in the internal affairs of Afghanistan and had been- as late as March 1979- strongly opposed to a request made by the Afghan government for the Soviet armed forces to intervene against the rebellious mujahideen there, the Soviets changed their mind over the next eight months or so. One reason was the deteriorating political and military situation within Afghanistan which favoured the potential success of the mujahideen in overthrowing the secular government of that country. The Soviets believed that the Islamic insurgency in Afghanistan had been fomented by the US and, possibly, China, mostly through Pakistan. The Soviets argued that the aim of those adversaries of their country was the destabilization of the nearby Soviet Union’s own Muslim-majority Central Asian republics, namely Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Khazakstan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan. A second, very important reason that may have strongly convinced the Soviets to invade Afghanistan was the success of the Islamic revolution in Iran several months earlier. The Soviets became very worried about the new Iranian regime’s determination to export its own fiery brand of revolutionary Islam to other parts of the world, which would include the aforementioned Soviet Union’s Muslim-majority Central Asian republics. It seems that the combination of the two above-mentioned factors finally persuaded the Soviets to invade Afghanistan in order to create a buffer zone against the spread of Islamic jihadism. Furthermore, the Islamic revolution in Iran gave rise to a horrific, eight-year war with Iraq (1980-1988). The ripple effects of the Islamic revolution in Iran and the consequent Soviet invasion of Afghanistan also extended to include the massive strengthening of the mujahideen in Soviet-occupied Afghanistan in the 1980s, mainly as a result of the enormous amount of money, weaponry, and training that the US provided for them. This, we now all know, later boomeranged on the US when many of those mujahideen subsequently formed Al-Qaeda who then went on to perpetrate the horrors of 9/11. That event somehow convinced the US to invade Iraq in 2003 without any authorization from the UN and based on the unfounded claims of Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction and its connections to Al-Qaeda. That invasion of Iraq later indirectly brought about the emergence of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL (sometimes referred to as ISIS- the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria- later named IS, or the Islamic State group). It is, therefore, not inconceivable that if there had been no Islamic revolution in Iran, the Soviets might not have invaded Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda might not have been formed, 9/11 might not have happened, the 2003 invasion of Iraq might not have occurred, and the Islamic State group might not have been formed.
The Islamic Republic of Iran then continued to provide extensive support to a network of terror groups. This went on for decades. During the Trump Administration, however, Iran faced much hardship. President Trump starved the Iranian regime of money directly and through pressure exerted on other countries, most notably China. The acute shortage of funds felt by the Iranian regime at that time caused a vitiation of its terror support. President Biden’s decision to unlock the huge wealth denied to Iran under the previous administration and the lifting of any pressure on other countries’ support for Iran has brought about a massive resurgence in Iran’s ability to sustain its network of terror groups. Although the Shi’ites of Iran had for many centuries regarded Najaf as the third holiest city- after Mecca and Madina- the Islamic Republic of Iran switched from Najaf to Jerusalem. It then set its eyes upon Israel which it regarded as an alien body living on Muslim holy lands. It has since invested huge amounts of time, money, and effort in order to weaken and- hopefully- destroy Israel. In the process, and over many years, it has nurtured, fostered, and sustained fanatical, anti-Israel terrorist organizations, most notably Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the Shi’ite militias in Syria and Iraq. It is suspected that Iran urged Hamas to launch its 7th of October 2023 terror attack in order to scuttle the growing closeness and potential normalization of diplomatic relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
One day after Hamas’s terror attack, and without any provocation on the part of Israel, Hezbollah attacked that country with a barrage of missiles on the 8th of October. Over the past year, Israel has been fighting an existential war against its enemies on multiple fronts. It has achieved major successes in destroying the military structure of Hamas in Gaza and killing many of its top leaders, including Haniyeh and Deif; it has pummelled the Houthis in Yemen in retaliation for their earlier attacks on Israel; and it has lately escalated its retaliation in Lebanon by decapitating Hezbollah, destroying much of its weaponry, and launching a reportedly limited invasion of southern Lebanon with the aim of moving Hezbollah back beyond the Litani River. In fact, the 2006 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 had called for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon, the disarming of armed groups- such as Hezbollah- and the presence of only the Lebanese military and the UNIFIL in southern Lebanon, south of the Litani River. All the major parties involved agreed to comply with it. Israel did withdraw from Lebanon. As we have seen, however, Hezbollah has been back in that area which should have had only the UNIFIL and the Lebanese military in it. The Israeli government’s determination to stop the dangerous threats and attacks from Hezbollah against Israel and its commitment to the returning of the tens of thousands of Israeli residents of the north to their homes are what have impelled Israel to launch its latest operations in Lebanon.
In April 2024, and in an apparent retaliation for Israel’s attack on a building linked to its embassy in Syria that killed some high-ranking members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC), Iran, for the first time ever, and in coordination with its proxies in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria, launched hundreds of suicide drones, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles on Israel. The Iranians had apparently given forewarnings of the attack through Turkey. Israel’s air defence array, with some assistance from the pro-Israel coalition, led by the US, intercepted almost all of those missiles and drones. The overall damage was very minor. Israel’s friends, especially the US, subsequently exerted tremendous pressure on Israel not to launch a massive attack on Iran in retaliation. Israel complied. Its retaliation was impressively restrained. All in all, it was seen by many in Israel and the West that Iran’s attack was merely to make a point, but not much beyond that. However, Iran launched a second, bigger attack on Israel in October 2024, allegedly in retaliation for Israel’s attacks on Iran’s proxies and their leaders. This time, however, no prior warning was given by Iran. It appears that the Iranian regime wanted to inflict serious harm on Israel this time. While Israel has used its Iron Dome in intercepting short-range missiles from Gaza and Lebanon, it has used its David’s Sling in intercepting medium-range missiles, and has probably also used its Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 for intercepting long-range missiles from Iran. Unlike the previous attack in April, this time Israel is unlikely to be restrained in its intention to launch severe acts of retaliation against Iran. Differently from the April 2024 attack, Israel’s allies, including the US, do not seem to be trying to bring pressure to bear on the Israelis to exert self-control. Israel’s likely targets could well be Iran’s nuclear sites, its oil and gas industry, or some other strategic sectors seen as vital to the Iranian regime.
In his famous essay, “Shooting an Elephant,” George Orwell said that his reason for killing an elephant in Burma- which he personally thought he should never have killed- was “solely to avoid looking a fool.” On the face of it, Iran seems to have attacked Israel directly with missiles in October 2024 in order to avoid looking like a fool before the Iranian population and, more importantly, before its proxies in the Middle East following the defeat of Hamas and the decimation of Hezbollah by Israel. However, unlike Orwell’s shooting of the elephant where he felt very guilty about killing it, Iran appears to have had no compunction in attempting to murder countless Israelis and destroy the state of Israel. Therein lies a regime with no political intelligence or moral standards. Cyrus the Great would have been grossly ashamed.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Husam Dughman is a Libyan Canadian political scientist, religious thinker, linguist, and an expert on immigrants and refugees. He received his formal education in Libya and the UK. Mr. Dughman later worked as a university professor of political science in Libya. Due to confrontations with the Qaddafi regime, he resigned from his university position and subsequently worked in legal translation. Mr. Dughman has been working with new immigrant and refugee services in both Canada and the US since 2006.
Husam Dughman has published a book entitled Tête-à-tête with Muhammad. He has also written numerous articles on politics and religion. He has just completed the full manuscript of a book which he hopes to have published in the near future. The new book is an in-depth examination of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and the non-religious school of thought.
