The Lebanese conflict could develop into a conflagration for the entire region. It could result in a large-scale war, directly involving Syria, Israel and Iran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has never left any doubt over where he wants to stand in this drama.
″I have clarified to our friends in Washington and our friends in Moscow that we will operate in Syria, including southern Syria, in accordance with our understanding and in accordance with our security needs,″ the Israeli radio broadcaster Kan quoted Netanyahu as saying in an address last Monday to the members of the governing Likud party parliamentary group.
So what is the Islamic Republic doing now? What signals are coming from Tehran? Various and contradictory ones. And which of these signals should we take seriously? The answer is: read the Iranian newspaper ″Kayhan″! After all, it is seen as the voice of the hard core of Iran's power system.
On November 6, Kayhan published a front-page story suggesting that after the Houthi missile attack on Riyadh, Dubai could be next. Following the newspaper's headline, suddenly millions joined in with a social media discussion over what was no longer whether, but when the big clash would come. After all, experience has taught us to take Kayhan very seriously. The threat of war was felt everywhere, nervousness was tangible, the dollar rate rose on the Tehran black market.
This was all too much too soon, even by Iranian standards. An Iranian foreign ministry spokesman saw himself forced to intervene. Kayhan's headline is endangering national interests, he explained. But the next day in his leader, publisher Shariatmadari made it abundantly clear what was more in the national interest: supporting the oppressed Yemeni people or the skyscrapers in Dubai?
Following a decision by Iran's national security council, publication of Kayhan was suspended for two days, but the question posed by the newspaper is crucial for the Islamic Republic. To deflect any suspicion of weakness, one day later Iran's President Hassan Rouhani issued a robust warning to Saudi Arabia: ″You know the might and place of the Islamic republic. People more powerful than you have been unable to do anything against the Iranian people.″
Sleepwalking into war?
In both Tehran and Riyadh, powerful groups are fomenting campaigns and setting them on a collision course. The fires are also being stoked by external powers such as the U.S. and Israel. That a war would really increase the powers of those already holding it – Mohammad Ben Salman in Riyadh and Ali Khamenei in Tehran – is more than doubtful. Conflict could actually result in loss of power on both sides.
These were the days of the sleepwalkers – future historians will probably describe our days thus. This idea will not be an original one. A globally destructive war has already been described as the armed engagement of sleepwalkers. That was 1914, one hundred years ago. ″The Sleepwalkers – How Europe went to war in 1914″ is the title of a non-fiction book by the Australian historian Christopher Clark. Clark's core theory: no European power really wanted war at the time, but all the warring powers slid into it like sleepwalkers.
A war with Iran would undo all the plans laid by the ambitious Prince Mohammad Ben Salman for himself and his nation. And in Tehran, Khamanei may be omnipotent, but the country is neither economically nor militarily in a position to survive a war against Saudi Arabia. Not only because the Saudis have stockpiled top-of-the-range weapons worth hundreds of billions of dollars from all parts of the world. Israel and the U.S. also demonstratively hold their protective hands over the Saudis. Should Mohammad Ben Salman and Ali Khamenei nevertheless go to war, they will have been driven to it.
© Iran Journal
Translated from the German by Nina Coon