
Why Israel's attacks are backfiring as Iranians rally around the flag
Israel appears to have forgotten a lesson from the Iraqi invasion of Iran in 1980. Instead of inducing regime change, it led to the people of Iran rallying behind the Islamic Republic in the name of nationalism, not necessarily out of love for the clerical elite.
Rather than fuelling internal dissent, Israel's recent strikes have similarly sparked a resurgence of nationalist feeling - centred not on support for the regime, but on defence of the nation.
There have been public mourning ceremonies and online tributes. Even some of those once aligned with the 'Woman, Life, Freedom' movement have begun expressing solidarity with those they now frame as 'defenders of the homeland'.
In working-class neighbourhoods and rural areas, where opposition movements had struggled to gain a foothold, such sentiments are even stronger.
Israel's attempt to divide the Iranian people from their state has, at least for now, backfired. The dominant reaction inside Iran has not been jubilation or uprising, but a rallying around the flag - a phenomenon familiar to those who study the mechanics of national trauma and external threat.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
The targeting of high-ranking officials, far from emboldening calls for regime change, has been interpreted by many Iranians as a direct assault on national sovereignty.
Beyond Israel's high-profile air strikes on Iran's nuclear and missile infrastructure, and the deliberate suppression of Iran's air defence systems, the most consequential and defining achievement of Israel's recent military campaign lies elsewhere: in the targeted assassinations of Iran's top military leadership.
Broader ambitions
The deaths of Mohammad Bagheri, the Iranian army's chief of staff; Hossein Salami, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC); and Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the IRGC's Aerospace Force, among others, have left the upper echelons of Iran's military apparatus shaken.
These were not peripheral figures. They were the architects of Iran's regional deterrence doctrine, and their coordinated elimination - within hours - signals a shift in the nature and objectives of Israel's campaign.
The operation went far beyond a preemptive strike against nuclear escalation; it delivered a calibrated blow to the strategic command structure of the Islamic Republic.
Israel might have inadvertently provided the Islamic Republic with a powerful political gift: a moment of cohesion, a common enemy
While Israeli officials officially maintain that their core objective is to stall or derail Iran's nuclear ambitions, the scale and precision of the strikes - particularly Monday's attack on a national television station, and the assassinations of top officials - suggest broader ambitions.
For years, there has been speculation in regional and western policy circles that Israel's long-term strategic calculus views a strong, stable and territorially intact Iran as an enduring geopolitical threat. Israel regards Iran not merely as a hostile state, but as a regional civilisational rival whose power must be contained - not just its nuclear programme, but its very political and geographic coherence.
This strategic logic has shaped decades of covert operations, diplomatic isolation efforts, and economic sanctions. It also informs long-standing ideas - whispered and sometimes stated outright - about eventual regime change, and even the fracturing of Iran into smaller, weaker successor states.
Such visions, once confined to hawkish policy white papers in Washington and Tel Aviv, gained renewed currency in the wake of the nationwide protests in Iran following the 2022 death of Mahsa Amini. The uprising, led by women and youth under the slogan 'Woman, Life, Freedom', presented the clearest domestic challenge to the Islamic Republic in a generation.
Sensing an opportunity, both the US and Israel amplified their support for opposition groups. Among them, Reza Pahlavi - the exiled crown prince - emerged as a symbolic figure. His widely publicised visit to Israel, and his statements openly calling for coordinated support to overthrow the Islamic Republic, was unprecedented. This convergence of opposition figures and foreign governments marked a shift from passive solidarity to open alignment.
Liberation narrative
That realignment became more explicit in the aftermath of this month's strikes, when Israel's messaging pivoted. No longer framed solely around nuclear non-proliferation, Israel began portraying its operations as part of a broader struggle to liberate the Iranian people from a repressive regime.
The narrative emphasises a separation between the Islamic Republic and the Iranian populace, insisting that this is not a war against Iran, but against its rulers. Public campaigns have sought to connect Israel's military actions to the aspirations of ordinary Iranians. Diaspora figures such as Pahlavi and former footballer Ali Karimi have publicly echoed this framing, calling on Iranians to support the downfall of the regime.
But despite the clear strategic communications effort, the campaign has failed to capture the domestic imagination in Iran.
A colonial reckoning: How Israel's war on Iran reopens old wounds Read More »
What the Israeli leadership and its allies might have underestimated is the Iranian public's deeply ingrained historical memory and reflexive resistance to foreign intervention. While opposition to the Islamic Republic remains widespread, especially among younger and urban populations, the sight of a foreign military killing Iranian commanders on Iranian soil triggers an altogether different sentiment.
This shift is not just symbolic. The level of domestic unity being observed, especially in contrast to past periods of internal unrest - such as the 2019 fuel protests or the Amini demonstrations - suggests that Israel might have inadvertently provided the Islamic Republic with a powerful political gift: a moment of cohesion, a common enemy, and a temporary suspension of internal divisions.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has thus joined the ranks of Saddam Hussein, whose decision to invade Iran in 1980 consolidated Ayatollah Khomeini's precarious position among other revolutionary factions in Iran.
It is premature to say whether this unity will last. Iran remains a deeply fractured society with generational, ideological and economic cleavages. But for now, it is clear that the Israeli strikes have not accelerated regime collapse; rather, they might have delayed it. And in the long arc of strategic planning, Israel's most recent operation may be remembered not for what it destroyed - but for what it unintentionally reinforced.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The National
24 minutes ago
- The National
Iran has backed itself into a corner in the conflict with Israel and the US
The continuing standoff between Iran on one side and a US-backed Israel on the other is happening not just in military terms but also in the realm of representation. The warring parties are performing in the battlefield and in the public domain. The latter acts as a window that reveals both political and military strengths and weaknesses, giving a glimpse of the course this war is likely to take. Military developments as well as public messaging strongly indicate that Iran is fighting a losing battle. Israel is framing its attacks on Iran as being about self-defence; presenting the Iranian population with an opportunity for freedom; and saving the world from the threat posed by Tehran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeatedly urged the Iranian people to rise up against the establishment, casting Israel as their external liberator. But his framing of Iran as a threat to the world transforms the war from a bilateral issue into a global matter. This framing was echoed by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz who described Israel's attacks as 'dirty work Israel is doing for all of us', with 'us' here referring to Israel's allies but also the world at large. Such a characterisation of the attacks on Iran is meant to serve as an endorsement of their legitimacy and necessity, standing in stark contrast to the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, which many countries in and outside the West publicly condemned as illegal. Though Israel's attacks are presented as being for the sake of global security, it is the US that has taken ownership of the overall narrative of the war. Even if Washington does not directly intervene in the war militarily, President Donald Trump has presented the US as its agenda setter. He has called on Iran to surrender, insinuated that the life of its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is in the US's hands, and said that 'we have complete and total control of the skies over Iran'. Tehran appeared to regard the chances of US intervention against Iran's nuclear facilities to be unlikely despite Mr Trump's repeated affirmations that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons During the Israel-Hezbollah war, the Israeli army's Arabic-language spokesperson, Avichay Adraee, gained prominence for issuing orders to Lebanese residents to "evacuate" their homes ahead of Israeli strikes, leading many commentators to say that Mr Adraee had become the de facto leader in those areas. Mr Trump is playing a similar role in his call for the residents of Tehran to 'evacuate'. The statements by Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu are not incidental. They are crafted to send a message to Tehran's ruling class that it is the US and Israel that are in charge in Iran. This is an example of psychological warfare amplified by the tools of the digital age, where such statements are not only repeated in the media but also go viral. Mr Trump has also played on the blindness of the Iranian regime regarding the position of the US towards Iran. Tehran appeared to regard the chances of US intervention against Iran's nuclear facilities to be unlikely despite Mr Trump's repeated affirmations that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. Mr Trump's 'I may do it; I may not do it' statement about direct US attacks on Iranian nuclear sites serves as a tool to undermine the Iranian establishment's self-belief. The messages from the US and Israel have also caused a notable shift in Hezbollah's public discourse. Following the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, Hezbollah swiftly declared that it would join Hamas in what the Lebanese group called 'the war of assistance'. For several months, Hezbollah kept issuing messages of defiance through its various communication channels and the speeches of its then-leader Hassan Nasrallah. The present situation is rather different. When Israel began attacking Iran earlier this month, Hezbollah was quick to issue a statement saying the group would not initiate an attack on Israel in the course of the war. The choice of language was for the group to try to save face in justifying its inability to support Iran militarily against Israel. Iran is left alone in trying to save itself and its reputation. While the Islamic Republic's rise is commonly associated with the notion of revolution, Tehran has, from the beginning, also adopted a framework of victimisation as a core part of its identity. As early as 1979, Iran's rulers presented the country as a victim of US imperialism, saying that resistance against this American project was a key mission for the republic. Such framing has not gone away. Iran continues to call the US 'the Great Satan' and justifies much of its foreign interventions in terms of countering what it regards as American evil. Having adopted this rigid framing of the US for almost five decades, Tehran has backed itself into a corner. Being seen to compromise in the face of American pressure means losing the credibility that the Iranian establishment has cultivated in the eyes of its supporters both domestically and regionally. This is why Mr Khamenei's response to Mr Trump's call for Iran to surrender has been to recycle the same tired trope of 'this nation is not one to surrender'. Some observers are making comparisons between the current war Iran is fighting and the Iran-Iraq War, which ended in 1988 when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini reluctantly accepted that Tehran had no choice but to 'drink the poisoned chalice'. There is speculation whether Iran will eventually follow a similar scenario regarding Israel. But for Iran, Israel is the US-backed 'Little Satan'. There can be no compromise as far as Iran's ruling class is concerned because this would mean losing its raison d'etre. If the end game is defeat either way, the regime would rather face it as a victim than as a quitter.


Gulf Today
30 minutes ago
- Gulf Today
Tens of thousands join pro-Palestinian marches in London and Berlin
Tens of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters marched in London and Berlin on Saturday calling for an end to the war in Gaza, amid concerns that the Iran-Israel conflict could spark wider regional devastation. Protesters in the British capital waved Palestinian flags, donned keffiyeh scarves and carried signs including "Stop arming Israel" and "No war on Iran" as they marched in the sweltering heat. "It's important to remember that people are suffering in Gaza. I fear all the focus will be on Iran now," said 34-year-old Harry Baker, attending his third pro-Palestinian protest. "I don't have great love for the Iranian regime, but we are now in a dangerous situation," he added. There have been monthly protests in the British capital since the start of the 20-month-long war between Israel and Hamas, which has ravaged Gaza. Demonstrators protest against conditions in Gaza and to impose sanctions against Israel and against arms shipments in front of the Reichstag building. Reuters Saturday's march comes amid heightened global tensions as the United States mulls joining Israel's strikes against Iran. Cries of "Palestine will be free" rang out as protesters carried signs saying "Hands off Gaza" or "Stop starving Gaza." Gaza is suffering from famine-like conditions according to UN agencies in the region following an Israeli aid blockade. Gaza's civil defence agency has reported that hundreds have been killed by Israeli forces while trying to reach the US- and Israeli-backed aid distribution sites. Protesters wave Palestinian and Iranian flags as they take part in a march through central London on Saturday. AFP "People need to keep their eyes on Gaza. That's where the genocide is happening," said 60-year-old protester Nicky Marcus. "I feel frustrated, angry because of what's happening in Gaza," said 31-year-old data analyst Jose Diaz. "It's in everyone's eyes. It's still on after so many months," Diaz added. 'Scared' The overall death toll in Gaza since the war broke out has reached at least 55,637 people, according to the health ministry. A 31-year-old Iranian student who did not want to share her name, told AFP she had family in Iran and was "scared". "I'm worried about my country. I know the regime is not good but it's still my country. I'm scared," she said. Tehran said over 400 people have been killed in Iran since Israel launched strikes last week claiming its arch-foe was close to acquiring a nuclear weapon, which Iran denies. Some 25 people have been killed in Israel, according to official figures. In Berlin, more than 10,000 people gathered in the centre of the city in support of Gaza, according to police figures. "You can't sit on the sofa and be silent. Now is the time when we all need to speak up," said protestor Gundula, who did not want to give her second name. "Germany finances, Israel bombs" was among the chants from the crowd, which gathered mid-afternoon close to the German parliament. For Marwan Radwan, the point of the protest was to bring attention to the "genocide currently taking place" and the "dirty work" being done by the German government. Agence France-Presse


Khaleej Times
an hour ago
- Khaleej Times
Israel-Iran conflict: B-2 bombers, bunker-busters; what to know about US' most advanced weapons
The US Air Force's B-2 Spirit stealth bomber represents one of America's most advanced strategic weapons platforms, capable of entering sophisticated air defences and delivering precision strikes against hardened targets such as Iran's buried network of nuclear research facilities. The US military is ready to carry out any decision that President Donald Trump may make on Iran, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Wednesday, adding that Tehran should have heeded the President's calls for it to make a deal on its nuclear programme prior to the start of Israel's strikes on Friday. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected Trump's demand for unconditional surrender on Wednesday, and the US President said his patience had run out, though he gave no clue as to what his next step would be. B-2 Spirit specifications The US B-2 costs about $2.1 billion each, making it the most expensive military aircraft ever built. Made by Northrop Grumman the bomber with its cutting-edge stealth technology, began its production run in the late 1980s but was curbed by the fall of the Soviet Union. Only 21 were made after the Pentagon's planned acquisition programme was truncated. The bomber's range of over 6,000 nautical miles without refueling enables global strike capabilities from continental US bases. With aerial refueling, the B-2 can reach virtually any target worldwide, as demonstrated in missions from Missouri to Afghanistan and Libya. Its payload capacity of more than 40,000 pounds allows the aircraft to carry a diverse array of conventional and nuclear weapons. The bomber's internal weapons bays are specifically designed to maintain stealth characteristics while accommodating large ordnance loads which could include two GBU-57A/B MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator), a 30,000-pound precision-guided "bunker buster" bomb. The two-pilot crew configuration reduces personnel requirements while maintaining operational effectiveness through advanced automation systems. The B-2's stealth technology incorporates radar-absorbing materials and angular design features that minimise detection by enemy air defence systems. Its radar cross-section is reportedly comparable to that of a small bird, making it nearly invisible to conventional radar. Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) The 30,000-pound MOP represents the largest conventional bomb in the U.S. arsenal, specifically engineered to defeat hardened underground bunkers. Its massive size requires the B-2 to carry only one or two MOPs per mission, but provides unmatched bunker-penetration capability. The weapon's 20.5-foot length and GPS-guided precision targeting system enable accurate strikes against specific underground facilities. Its penetration capability of over 200 feet through hardened concrete makes it effective against the world's most protected underground installations. Conventional payloads Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) provide the B-2 with precision conventional strike capability against fixed targets. These GPS-guided weapons can be deployed in large numbers, with the bomber capable of simultaneously engaging multiple targets with high accuracy. Joint Standoff Weapons (JSOW) extend the aircraft's engagement range while maintaining stealth characteristics during approach. These glide bombs allow the B-2 to strike targets from outside heavily defended airspace perimeters. Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSM) offer long-range precision strike capability with their own stealth features. The extended-range JASSM-ER variant provides strike options against targets over 500 miles (805 km) away. Nuclear payload capabilities The B-2 Spirit serves as a key component of America's nuclear triad, capable of delivering strategic nuclear weapons with stealth and precision. The aircraft can carry up to 16 B83 nuclear bombs.