International Courant
In the dead of night corridors of energy in Tehran, the assassination of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in late July, extensively believed to have been carried out by Israel, upset a precarious steadiness.
The timing of this escalation within the long-running battle between Iran and Israel couldn’t have been worse. Newly sworn-in President Masoud Pezeshkian was nonetheless getting used to his function when this geopolitical fireball was dropped in his lap.
For Iran’s Supreme Chief, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the assassination of the Palestinian group’s chief was greater than a provocation; it was an existential problem.
The explosion that killed Haniyeh, which Iran believed was a missile fired from inside its borders, was a violation of sovereignty that angered Tehran and jeopardized Khamenei’s presidency in 2003. fatwa the prohibition of the manufacturing, use and stockpiling of nuclear weapons underneath enhanced supervision.
Strategic implications
In line with a senior Iranian official who spoke to Al Jazeera on situation of anonymity, there was already debate earlier than Haniyeh’s killing about whether or not Khamenei’s fatwa on nuclear weapons served Iran’s strategic priorities.
Khamenei has led Iran by means of world adjustments, from the tip of the Chilly Warfare to the rise of US unipolarity and conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria – and thru the fraught historical past of Iran’s nuclear cope with world powers.
Now, at 85, he should safe the way forward for the Islamic republic, a crucial juncture that can require greater than maneuvers within the “grey zone” — the area between struggle and peace that Iran has historically used to strain its adversaries.
The fallout might change the strategic panorama of the Center East as negotiators scramble to hammer out a ceasefire deal that may finish Israel’s brutal struggle in Gaza. Three weeks after the assassination, Iran has but to sign what it should do.
Requested whether or not Iran was holding again its assault on the Israeli regime in order that ceasefire negotiations might proceed, Iran’s everlasting consultant to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, informed Al Jazeera: “The timing… of Iran’s response shall be rigorously orchestrated to make sure that it comes at a second of most shock.”
In line with sources informed Al Jazeera, the killing sparked a heated debate in Iran, with some arguing that restraint was the wisest plan of action. They feared {that a} retaliatory strike might plunge Iran right into a protracted and expensive confrontation with Israel, weakening Tehran and its regional allies.
The cautious camp – drawn from throughout the Iranian political spectrum – additionally expressed hope that calm now might function leverage in future negotiations with the US, probably opening a brand new chapter in US-Iranian relations and offering a extra forceful response to Netanyahu’s provocations.
A lady holds a poster as she attends the funeral procession of slain Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on August 1, 2024. (Majid Asgaripour/West Asia Information Company by way of Reuters)
Khamenei’s selection
Khamenei disagreed.
In a dialog with officers on August 14, he stated Iran shouldn’t be intimidated by the psychological warfare utilized by its enemies.
He referred to the Quran and added that “non-tactical withdrawals, whether or not navy, political, media or financial, will invite divine wrath.” Whereas there isn’t any indication but of what he’ll do, it’s a selection that might change the strategic panorama of the Center East.
The nuclear challenge complicates issues additional.
Till now, Iran’s nuclear coverage has revolved round the fitting to own peaceable nuclear know-how, Khamenei’s fatwa on the problem and the fitting to dwell in a nuclear-weapon-free zone, an official who spoke on situation of anonymity informed Al Jazeera.
“In a broad sense, Iran’s nuclear coverage nonetheless doesn’t fall into the class of nuclear ambiguity, like Israel’s,” the official stated, referring to Israel’s refusal to reveal what nuclear capabilities it has.
Nonetheless, a press release by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the UN final September and an Israeli minister who advocated equipping Gaza with nuclear weapons are seen as a menace by Iran, the official stated, prompting Iran to rethink its technique.
The US’ unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal is one more reason for Iran to rethink its method, they added. Iran entered the nuclear negotiations hoping that sanctions towards it might be lifted in alternate for curbs on its nuclear program.
“However what occurred (when the US left the nuclear deal)?” they ask rhetorically.
“Iran needed to endure the US most strain coverage with out having the ability to do something.”
Will nuclear doctrine change?
“Iran’s response should… punish the aggressor for its terrorist act and violations of Iran’s nationwide sovereignty (and) strengthen Iran’s deterrence capabilities to instill deep regret throughout the Israeli regime, thus serving as a deterrent,” UN Ambassador Iravani stated.
“Furthermore,” he added, “Iran’s response should be rigorously calibrated to keep away from any attainable detrimental penalties that might probably have an effect on a possible ceasefire (in Gaza).”
That may be a probably unimaginable steadiness.
On this context, the nameless official says: “The threats proven by the Zionist entity (Israel) and the shift from a coverage of ambiguity about their nuclear program to a transparent coverage of nuclear threats towards Iran on the United Nations… recommend that they could later goal the nuclear services themselves.”
They add: “Iran should keep its sovereignty, and … it’s contemplating revising its doctrine. If Israel’s nuclear weapons should not eliminated, there shall be competitors to own nuclear weapons within the area, and Iran will completely reassess its technique.”
Iran’s Ambassador to the UN Amir Saeid Iravani speaks on the UN Safety Council on April 14, 2024 (Eduardo Munoz/Reuters)
Requested whether or not they thought that if Iran adjustments its nuclear doctrine it might additionally begin producing nuclear weapons, particularly since Western and Israeli estimates point out that it might take not more than a month to provide a nuclear warhead, the nameless official replied within the detrimental.
“Any change in nuclear doctrine doesn’t essentially imply shifting towards nuclear weapons,” the official stated, including that it might imply altering the present nuclear technique, and affirming that any change would goal Israel because it threatens Iran.
Such a change might elevate considerations amongst Iran’s neighbors, however the official added: “We’re open to any method to reassure our neighbors about our nuclear capabilities.
“The query stays whether or not our neighbors are prepared to reassure us about their arms purchases and the menace posed by the presence of American bases on their soil.”
In the end, the alternatives Khamenei faces are just like the bitter cups from which he should drink. The supreme chief faces a check of endurance as he weighs the choices earlier than him, every fraught with important dangers and unsure outcomes.
The stakes have by no means been greater because the world watches Tehran grapple with its most necessary determination in a long time.
Khamenei’s calculation: Iran’s supreme chief faces bitter selection over Israel | Information in regards to the Israeli-Palestinian battle
Africa Area Information ,Subsequent Large Factor in Public Knowledg
