- Editorials
- Posted
Kassioun Editorial 1270: After the War on Iran!
Today, Sunday, March 22, marks the 23rd day of the “Israeli”/American war against Iran, which began as a blitzkrieg aimed at destroying Iran and its regime, ultimately leading to the fragmentation of Iran as part of the “Greater Israel project”. It has since turned into a war of attrition, quicksand, and a dangerous quagmire in which the aggressor powers—and with them the entire global economy—are sinking.
Description-wise
What can be confirmed in describing the current state of the war are the following points:
First: None of the objectives set by Netanyahu and Trump for their war has been achieved—toppling the Iranian regime, ending the nuclear program, ending the missile program, and ending Iran’s support and connections with allied forces and groups in the region. On the contrary, all of these goals have become further and harder to attain than they were before the war.
Second: The capacity for resisting—not only “Israel” but also the US—is real, existing, and tangible; its only condition is the presence of political will.
Third: An open-ended war of attrition, with no timeline and with US inability to open the Strait of Hormuz, means the US is slipping into a predicament likened to Vietnam—but with consequences that will be greater and more severe than those of Vietnam.
The Outcomes
When the war in Ukraine began four years ago, in February 2022, we outlined in Kassioun editorial 1059, “The Post-Ukraine World” on February 27, 2022, five general trends we expected at the international and regional levels.
Briefly, these trends are:
1- Expiration of the global political system established after World War II, including the UN, the structure, balances, and mechanisms of which will be reconsidered to reflect a new global equilibrium.
2- Expiration of the historical role of NATO, and time has come for its dissolution.
3- The Western, US-led financial system—including the petrodollar, SWIFT, and all forms of unequal exchange—has entered a phase of decline.
4- New waves of global popular movements will emerge as a result of worsening economic crises fueled by the continuation of war.
5- The door will be opened for various regional crises to be resolved in a way contrary to—and independent from—the old global order.
The current war, despite its still-unfinished outcomes, has confirmed these trends, reinforced them, and made them clearer and more visible. Moreover, this war has strengthened the prospects of the “encircling the ring” and the five-way alliance—Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan—which we have previously discussed, in the face of the “Greater Israel project”. This is because those harmed and targeted by this war—namely all the peoples and all the regimes of our region—have to get closer and cooperate against the existential threat posed by the Zionist entity and the US. The latter has demonstrated in every possible way that it will defend no one except “Israel” (to the extent that it can), and that it is hostile to all the peoples of the region regardless of their nationalities, religions, or sects. Perhaps the foolish statement by US Secretary of War yesterday—declaring hostility toward Muslims as a whole, both Sunni and Shia—is a clear example and a signal of what relations among the peoples of the region should respond to.
Syria?
As we noted in the last editorial, the medium- and long-term effects will be in our favor as Syrians, while the short-term effects will be difficult and harsh—economically, security-wise, and politically. “Israel” will attempt to strike at us through direct or indirect means whenever possible.
We also said that the solution remains—and still lies—in fundamentally different policies, through a national unity government. Our call for such a government is directed first and foremost to the Syrian people, not as a favor granted by anyone, but as a genuine government with real powers—not a mere façade for continuing the same policies.
Such a government must deal with the emergency situation in a rescue-oriented manner through two parallel approaches: externally, understanding the true balance of power and moving toward balanced relations, with a primary orientation toward the rising East rather than a declining US; and internally, turning toward the Syrian people—especially the more than 95% living below the poverty line—seeking to unify them and defend their interests against brutal liberalization, corruption, and plundering. This should rely primarily on internal capacities, rather than on promises of foreign aid that have evaporated in light of new realities. It should also work to unify Syrians through a general national conference with full powers, where all pending and emerging issues are placed on the table so that Syrians can agree on how to resolve them—through their own free will, and without tutelage from anyone.
