Two Weeks In: A Defiant Tehran Faces A Confounded Washington |
On the 14th day of the ongoing Iran war, Iranians stood in solidarity with the brave Palestinians during the International Quds Day processions. What was remarkable about today’s proceedings was that Iran’s top leadership was part of them.
Amidst bombings and unrelenting threats of further decapitation strikes, President Masoud Pezeshkian, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, and other officials were seen among enthusiastic Iranians on the streets of Tehran. Given that both Israel and the US have vowed to eliminate the Iranian leadership, hitting the roads is both daring and risky. That being said, these visuals must be seen in a broader context.
The public appearance of such high-ranking officials shows that the officialdom is largely unfazed by both the brutal bombing campaign and the threat of being targeted. This sends an important signal to Iran’s adversaries: your attacks have neither deterred nor broken us.
More importantly, it appears to be a direct response to US President Donald Trump, who remarked that there is nothing left to target in Iran. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth also taunted Iranian leaders, saying they are “hiding like rats.”
Two other reasons might account for the decision to come out in the open. First, it amply demonstrates and reinforces the Islamic Republic’s commitment to the Palestinian cause. Such optics are good for Iran, as they help position the Islamic Republic as the only sincere actor in the fight against Israel.
In other words, showing solidarity with the Palestinians when its own survival is threatened is yet another way to burnish Iran's credentials as a veritable friend of the Palestinians.
US intelligence is not too optimistic about the prospect of regime change in Iran. All of this has likely prompted President Trump to mention war termination in his speeches
US intelligence is not too optimistic about the prospect of regime change in Iran. All of this has likely prompted President Trump to mention war termination in his speeches
Second, by leading public rallies, officials have shown that, contrary to expectations, the Islamic Republic is in control of the situation within the country. It also clearly suggests that, rather than protest, the public is standing in unison with the Islamic Republic against foreign aggression.
Sending this signal is important in more ways than one. Foremost, it tells Iran's adversaries and the world that kinetic action has not delivered the desired results. This, in and of itself, calls into question both Washington’s militarised approach toward Tehran and its support for Tel Aviv’s war efforts.
Overall, this mingling fits with Iran’s defiant posture. Its engagement in an asymmetric war, marked by the use of drones and missiles, as well as the blockade of the all-important Strait of Hormuz, underscores that it is in it for the long haul.
This is also evidenced by the first message of Iran's new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei. Apropos of the ongoing war, his message called for punishing the enemy, targeting its vulnerabilities and weak points, and leveraging the closure of the Strait.
All of this, coupled with Iran’s refusal to participate in any kind of negotiation process, underlines that its capitulation is not in the cards.
The US, on the other hand, appears to have been taken aback. Reportedly, Iran’s retaliatory effort has surprised policymakers in Washington. Moreover, the US has suffered casualties and losses, including its defence equipment, in the Persian Gulf.
Last but not least, US intelligence is not too optimistic about the prospect of regime change in Iran. All of this has likely prompted President Trump to mention war termination in his speeches.
He has argued that Iran is a patch on its past, the US has won, and he can end the war at a time of his own choosing. However, these enunciations are in sharp contrast to threats and unremitted attacks on Iranian cities. These strikes also include the ones in Kharg.
Therefore, one could argue that, caught by surprise, the Trump administration is unsure about its campaign. It is faced with a dilemma: should it continue to use force and run the risk of creating further economic ruckus, or should it declare victory and let the regime remain in power?
Neither option is tenable for the US, as the regime will likely stay in power, irrespective of what Washington does.
This essentially means that the prospect of finding and taking off-ramps is dim. Resultantly, the war will continue, making Iran more risk-acceptant and indomitable, much to the detriment of regional peace and stability.