Easy regime change in Tehran is a nice idea. But look to history: it’s a near-impossible one | Martin Kettle
S.On the eve of the 1991 Gulf War, one of the United States captain Norman Schwarzkobf asked if he was expelling Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Stormmin Norman answered With an unforgettable positive: “It is easy to say. It is difficult to do.”
Schwarzkopf knew what he was talking about. The general was a student in the Middle East – who spent some years of childhood in Tehran – and military history. In fact, his successful strategy in the terrestrial war was designed to defeat Saddam in Kuwait with awareness of the airline tactics used by this destructive effect by Commander Carthane Hannibal to defeat the Romans in Kanye in 216BC.
System change, which has now been increasingly mentioned regarding IranIt is the embodiment of the high bets of a “easy, difficult to do” policy. It is clear that the world will be a better place without repressive and aggressive systems like those in Tehran. But there is no crane that can be easily pulled, and there is no button that can be pressed, and it replaces permanent tyranny immediately with permanent happiness. The destruction is not the same for rebuilding.
Instead, the system change is a phrase that often hides many constant problems and misery, and most of them suffered severely by ordinary people whose system changed. In the West, modern governments and their fans had to learn this in the difficult way. The invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and the 2003 Iraq War is still chasing our policy, years later. The deformed result of the so -called Arab Spring 2010-11 It is a dark memorial for the same naivety.
However, the desire to see the back of the Iranian theocratic system is correct. Iran is one of the most repressive countries in the world. Arbitration arrests and experiences. Torture, including retreat and amputationSettlement. Common executions. The persecution of womenMinorities and immigrants are institutional. Political activity and free expression are all impossible.
The evil malicious of the regime is not only felt by the Iranians. The Islamic Republic has exported tyranny for years, through agents from Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and now by providing Russia in Ukraine. I funded and supported terrorism in the West. Her desire for nuclear weapons, which threaten her IsraelAnd that destroys it, is uncompromising.
So, if the opportunity is presented, then why don’t you try to replace this system? What cannot be supported in overthrowing it, especially in a moment when Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as the Yemeni Houthis, are on its military foot and the country feels the impact of international sanctions? It seems that the first days of the Israeli Benjamin Netanyahu attack on Iran have done Great damage To the nuclear and military infrastructure of the regime, and to expose restrictions in Iran’s ability to revenge and defend itself. So if not now, when?
The temptation is very real. In politics, as in war, the courage to seize the moment can be crucial. Bismarck considered this one of the final tests of the leadership, and it has proven to be a major practitioner. Shakespeare pointed to the same point in Julius Caesar, when Casius is told: “There is a wave in the affairs of men/ taken in the flood, leading to wealth.” Remember, though, what happened to Cassius in the end. Lost.
However, the overthrow of the Iranian regime would remove an international threat – to Israel in particular, but also to the nations that were destroyed and destroyed by Iran’s agents. Nuclear spread will be adjusted. The terrorist threat will be disrupted. It will be bad news for Russia, which deals with its way through large quantities of Iranian war materialsIncluding drones. It will be a glimmer of hope for Ukraine. The relief for global shipping and trade will be enormous. The prices of commodity may significantly reduce.
Therefore, it will not be right to reject these arguments in bulk, especially if the main reasons for doing this are that Netanyahu strikes for this, or because of the anger at the Israeli attacks in Gaza, it is terrible although it is not acquired. It will be equal to opposing the Iranian regime’s change just because policy may be adopted in the end The White House, which cannot be predicted by Donald Trump. Trump’s enemy is not our friend.
However, there are more dangerous and respectable reasons for caution. The first is that the destruction of the system does not mean changing the successful system. Israel can, with or without Trump’s direct military support, can cause sufficient damage to Iran to make it impossible for the regime to work. But what will come after that? Neither Israel nor the United States has any intention to occupy Iran’s defeated to operate it. The terrible lessons in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya are still alive. This is not Berlin in 1945.
In his broadcast to Iran this week, Netanyahu said that the Iranians should form new Iran. He said to them: “We are wiping the way to achieve your goal, which is freedom.” However, there is no virtual Iranian government awaiting the wings. Certainly, the regime promoted by Israel is fighting for survival. One of the United States, which allowed Trump and his allies to loot and enrich themselves at the expense of Iran will be better. The opposition of the theocratic state may be widespread as 80 % Netanyahu claimsBut at this stage it is underground, engraving and chopped.
The defeated Iran will be a weak country, but it is still very large, proud and important. It will be rich in natural resources, super power, and are still well armed. The ethnic and religious mix will take the opportunity to confirm their rights and demands. However, the followers and requirements of the old regime will be everywhere, not the least in the armed forces and the police. These are the components that can indicate a civil instability, and may last for years.
Do not forget, too, that Iran is still a revolutionary system. The rulers who come to power can become completely toppled their predecessors, as the Iranian Islamists did in 1979, regimes with great greatness. They may never give in He insisted yesterday. But the weak and angry Islamic Republic appears to be likely to be replaced.
History tells us that changing the system of revolutionary systems is a special chaotic action. It may be difficult to establish the topple systems in the first place. But those that replace them do not have easy either. He thought of France in 1815 or Russia in 1991. Germany was only saved from the Nazi abyss through a mixture of clear international agreement, American economic assistance, military occupation and practical concessions with German institutions. The result was a collective victory. It was, though, a very rare event. Nothing like him on the cards in Iran. Be careful with you.
