The Condemnations of Israel Are Half-Hearted
The countries surrounding Iran have condemned Israel's attack today. Some statements were more florid than others, and some were more convincing. Bahrain, whose monarchy Iran has repeatedly attempted to topple, urged Israel to de-escalate. Azerbaijan, whose secular government is constantly at odds with Iran, 'resolutely' reproached Israel for its attack but gave no indication that it would cease being a resolute ally of Israel and the United States. Iraq, whose Shiite-led government in many ways owes its existence to the Iranians, vowed that it would help Iran retaliate by sending a sternly worded letter to the United Nations. Among the quicker and more vigorous denunciations was Saudi Arabia's. 'The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia expresses its strong condemnation and denunciation of the blatant Israeli aggressions against the brotherly Islamic Republic of Iran,' it said, adding that the attacks were 'heinous.'
Green's Dictionary of Slang notes that the word heinous, when used by American teens, has at times meant fantastic, and it is no secret that among the countries that have issued denunciations are many senior officials who would consider the destruction of Iran's nuclear program heinous and rad indeed, an extreeeeeme escalation in the Harold and Kumar sense. Almost all of the countries surrounding Iran have reasons to prefer a weak Iran and to dread a nuclear one. Diplomacy often takes the form of elaborate, staged meetings and statements whose plain meanings differ from what the country's leaders actually feel. What they actually feel is not usually difficult to discern.
This lineup of eager denouncers is like the cast of a drawing-room murder mystery, where everyone is a suspect because everyone has a motive. The fact that Israel actually plunged the dagger into the deceased is incidental. Bahrain is ruled by Sunnis and has a mostly Shiite population permanently restless over its servile condition. Azerbaijan, too, is mostly Shiite, but it is proudly secular in orientation, and welcomes Iranians who come across its border to escape theocracy, get drunk, and take off their veils. Aykhan Hajizada, the spokesperson for the Azerbaijani foreign ministry, told me in Baku last year that Iran would sometimes conduct aggressive military drills across the border and complain about Azerbaijan's friendships with Iran's enemies. 'We are very open with them,' Hajizada said. 'We are building relations based on our national-security interests, and not based on the interests of the neighboring country.' A nuclear Iran would effectively end that independence.
But the clearest case of this duplicity (denunciation in public; You know, he kind of had it coming in private) is Saudi Arabia's. 'We don't look to Israel as an enemy,' Saudi Arabia's de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, told me in 2021. 'We look to them as a potential ally' with many common interests. By contrast, he referred to Iran as a neighbor that he 'could not get rid of,' and with whom he would realistically be forced to find a modus vivendi. In 2023, Saudi Arabia and Iran made a deal, brokered by China, that restored diplomatic relations and in theory healed the long-standing divisions between the countries.
But the fundamental facts of their relationship are irreconcilable. Theirs is not a love marriage. Iran's drones and missiles are aimed at Saudi Arabia's oil fields, and the biggest threat to the kingdom is, and has been for at least three decades, the possibility that Iran would destroy or disrupt its energy industry. Saudi Arabia on its own has no way to counter or deter that threat—which is why the United States and Israel are its natural allies. Iran has additionally fomented open revolt against the Saudi monarchy. In cities in the Shiite-majority Eastern province of Saudi Arabia, where much of the oil industry is, one can still see bullet-pocked walls and collapsed buildings where Saudi security services fought and ultimately crushed an Iranian-backed revolt in 2017.
None of these countries wants all-out war. And they certainly do not wish to volunteer themselves to be attacked, should Iran decide that Israel itself is too hard a target, and its allies are safer to pick on. Iran's neighbors have plenty of beef with Israel too, and have populations that would be pleased to watch the Jewish state humbled. But Israel's humiliation, if it must come, can wait. Iran has been unique among regional powers in its tendency to cultivate and arm allies abroad, and to aid those allies in their efforts in order to make trouble for incumbent autocracies, from Cairo to Baku to Sanaa. For Iran to go nuclear, and be able to dictate the terms of these relationships under the leisurely protection of an atomic umbrella, would be catastrophic for them all. Just don't expect them to say so.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hundreds protest in The Hague against NATO, days before the Dutch city hosts alliance summit
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Hundreds of people protested Sunday against NATO and military spending and against a possible conflict with Iran, two days before a summit of the alliance in The Hague that is seeking to increase allies' defense budgets. 'Let's invest in peace and sustainable energy,' Belgian politician Jos d'Haese told the crowd at a park not far from the summit venue. Although billed as a demonstration against NATO and the war in Gaza, protesters were joined by Iranians who held up banners saying 'No Iran War,' the day after the United States launched attacks against three of Iran's nuclear sites. 'We are opposed to war. People want to live a peaceful life,' said 74-year-old Hossein Hamadani, an Iranian who lives in the Netherlands. Look at the environment. 'Things are not good. So why do we spend money on war?' he added. The Netherlands is hosting the annual meeting of the 32-nation alliance starting Tuesday, with leaders scheduled to meet Wednesday. The heads of government want to hammer out an agreement on a hike in defense spending demanded by U.S. President Donald Trump. The deal appeared largely done last week, until Spain's Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez wrote to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that committing Madrid to spending 5% of its gross domestic product on defense 'would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive.' U.S. allies have ramped up defense spending since Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a full-scale invasion of Ukraine more than three years ago, but almost a third of them still don't meet NATO's current target of at least 2% of their gross domestic product. The summit is being protected by the biggest ever Dutch security operation, code named 'Orange Shield,' involving thousands of police and military personnel, drones, no-fly zones and cybersecurity experts. ___ Associated Press writer Molly Quell in The Hague contributed.
Los Angeles Times
31 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump says he's open to ‘regime change' in Iran, even as his aides insist otherwise
WASHINGTON — President Trump on Sunday called into question the future of Iran's ruling theocracy after a surprise attack on three of the country's nuclear sites, seemingly contradicting his administration's calls to resume negotiations and avoid an escalation in fighting. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change???' Trump posted on social media. 'MIGA!!!' The post on his social media platform marked a stark reversal from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's Sunday morning news conference that detailed the aerial bombing of Iran early Sunday. 'This mission was not and has not been about regime change,' Hegseth said. The administration has made clear it wants Iran to stop any development of nuclear weapons, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures' that any retaliation against the U.S. or a rush toward building a nuclear weapon would 'put the regime at risk.' But beyond that, the world is awash in uncertainty at a fragile moment that could decide whether parts of the globe tip into war or find a way to salvage a relative peace. Trump's message to Iran's leadership comes as the U.S. has warned Iran against retaliating for the bombardment targeting the heart of a nuclear program that it spent decades developing. The Trump administration has made a series of intimidating statements even as it has called for a restart of negotiations, making it hard to get a read on whether the U.S. president is simply taunting an adversary or using inflammatory words that could further widen the war between Israel and Iran that began with Israeli attacks on June 13. Until Trump's post Sunday afternoon, the coordinated messaging by his vice president, Pentagon chief, top military advisor and secretary of State suggested a confidence that any fallout would be manageable and that Iran's lack of military capabilities would ultimately force it back to the bargaining table. Hegseth had said that America 'does not seek war' with Iran, while Vice President JD Vance said the strikes had given Tehran the possibility of returning to negotiate with Washington. But the unfolding situation is not entirely under Washington's control, as Tehran has a series of levers to respond to the aerial bombings that could intensify the conflict in the Middle East with possible global repercussions. Iran can block oil being shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, attack U.S. bases in the region, engage in cyberattacks or accelerate its nuclear program — which might seem more of a necessity after the U.S. strikes. All of that raises the question of whether the U.S. bombing will open up a more brutal phase of fighting or revive negotiations out of an abundance of caution. In the U.S., the attack quickly spilled over into domestic politics, with Trump spending part of his Sunday going after his critics in Congress. He used a social media post to lambaste Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a stalwart Trump supporter who had objected to the president taking military action without specific congressional approval. 'We had a spectacular military success yesterday, taking the 'bomb' right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could!)' Trump wrote. Boak and Pesoli write for the Associated Press.
Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
Oil Climbs, Asian Equity Markets Fall After U.S. Attacks on Iran
Oil climbed and Asian equity markets fell after the U.S. carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend, raising concerns about an escalation of the conflict that began with Israeli attacks on Iran. Front-month WTI crude oil futures rose 2.8% to $75.89 a barrel on Monday, and front-month Brent crude oil futures added 2.7% to $79.09 a barrel
