Israel's Assault on Iran Is Unambiguously Criminal

Scores of countries across the world have issued a sharp condemnation of Israel's attacks on Iran. So what? There have also been sharp condemnations all along by members of the so-called international community of Israel's criminal actions against Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Do such condemnations amount to anything?

Apparently not, as political scientist, political economist, author, and journalist C. J. Polychroniou alludes to in the interview that follows with independent French-Greek journalist Alexandra Boutri, when Israel enjoys the full support of the biggest bully in the world (a.k.a. the United States of America). Nonetheless, Israel's latest adventure by the Netanyahu government is unambiguously criminal, says C. J. Polychroniou, and may ultimately change the strategic reality of the Middle East.

Alexandra Boutri: Fears of a broader conflict in the Middle East are rising fast following Israel's large-scale military attacks on Iran, which targeted key nuclear and missile sites and resulted in the deaths of Iran's top military officials and several of that nation's nuclear scientists. Why is the West silent over Israel's engagement in state-sponsored terrorism and its genocidal campaign against Palestinians? Why are there no efforts to isolate Israel diplomatically?

C. J. Polychroniou: Israel is a powerful nation and the closest ally of the United States, while its economy is fully integrated into the global economy. Due to the backing of the U.S., Israel feels that it is immune to any measure of international accountability. Indeed, as the Israeli dissident and genocide expert Raz Segal has explained, Israelis feel they are above the law. So, Israel can act like a rogue state with no fear of punishment. Western governments won't engage in any course of action to isolate Israel diplomatically, even when they know that Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is committing genocide in Gaza and engaging in state-sponsored terrorism, because that would mean going up against the United States. Needless to say, that makes all Western governments, including mainstream Western media, complicit in Israeli crimes. But what is even more infuriating and morally reprehensible is that "the more Israel kills, the more the West portrays it as a victim."

It's more than likely that what Netanyahu is after with Israel's surprise attack on Iran is the toppling of the Iranian regime itself.

Alexandra Boutri: Is there evidence that Iran was close to developing nuclear weapons? In either case, can Israel's assault on Iran be justified?

C. J. Polychroniou: There is a long history behind Iran's nuclear program. With assistance from the United States and Europe, Iran had launched an ambitious nuclear project under the Shah. But the Islamic revolution in 1979 and the subsequent war between Iran and Iraq put a halt to that project. However, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, Iran started working on a covert project to develop nuclear weapons called the Amad Plan. But the Amad Plan was abandoned in late 2003, perhaps due to the U.S. invasion of Iraq that same year. But Iran's nuclear program went on, and the official position of the Iranian government has been all along that it is solely for peaceful energy purposes. The country's nuclear facilities have been operating under the monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and U.S. intelligence agencies had assessed, even on the eve of Israel's bombardment of Tehran, that Iran was not building nuclear weapons.

With that in mind, the Israeli claim that Iran was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons is nothing new. Israeli leaders have been making such assertions for many years because, from the time of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, they have seen Iran as an "existential threat." And as iconic Israeli journalist Gideon Levy recently said, Netanyahu has long expressed a desire to wage war against Iran. In the meantime, no one talks about Israel's possession of nuclear weapons. Israel is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has not accepted IAEA safeguards. Of course, if it did so, and abided by the rules of international law, it would mean that Israel might be compelled not to act like a rogue state. Apparently, however, it prefers the latter status than being a normal state. Israel's attack on Iran was completely unprovoked and constitutes an act of calculated aggression. It is unambiguously criminal. As such, Iran has every right to defend itself.

Alexandra Boutri: Is Netanyahu's endgame regime change in Tehran? Could the U.S. and Gulf States be drawn into the Israel-Iran war? Also, what about the reports that there are deep political divisions to Iran's theocracy?

C. J. Polychroniou: It's more than likely that what Netanyahu is after with Israel's surprise attack on Iran is the toppling of the Iranian regime itself. Netanyahu's agenda is not confined to the liquidation of Palestinians in Gaza, the annexation of parts of the West Bank, and opposition to Palestinian sovereignty. It is based on the idea of "changing the strategic reality in the Middle East." And this means eliminating any perceived or real threats to Israel by whatever means necessary. Indeed, the Middle East will not be the same if the current regime in Tehran falls. The Gulf countries have unanimously condemned Israel's strikes on Iran even though their rulers have treated Iran in the recent past more of an enemy than Israel itself. But I think the Gulf countries are just as much anxious now about being drawn into the Israel-Iran war as they are about Israel's plans under Netanyahu to restructure the Middle East. By now, their rulers have probably also come to the realization that U.S. President Donald Trump is either incapable or unwilling to constrain Netanyahu's neoconservative foreign policy objectives.

It's true that there are deep political divisions facing the Iranian regime. This is a repressive regime by any account, although it is not accurate to describe Iranian rule as a theocracy. The Islamic Republic is structured around a constitutional framework, although it is surely not a democracy. The regime oppresses women and has crushed leftist groups. I suspect there is a strong anti-regime sentiment across Iranian society, and some groups may see Israel's attacks as the opportunity needed to bring down the regime. Little wonder why Netanyahu has urged Iranians to overthrow their government.