Kassioun Editorial 1272: The Right Positioning After the Iran War

Understanding the ongoing war in advance, and the results it will lead to, is not merely a theoretical or academic matter; it is an existential necessity for all countries and for all political and social forces—especially in our region, which is directly experiencing the event, and for our country, which is going through it in a difficult and fragile state on multiple levels. This makes correct and proactive positioning critically important, as the future of any state, political force, or regional alliance depends on it.

The clear outcome so far is that none of the American or “Israeli” objectives of the war have been achieved, nor is there any prospect of achieving them. In fact, an “emergency” objective has become the primary goal of the war—at least from the American perspective—namely, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which had been open before the war began. Perhaps the clearest thing that can be said about any war in history is that the losing side seeks, during the war, to return to the pre-war situation—simply because it is losing and its post-war position is worse than before. Today, the US is striving hard to return to the pre-war status quo, where the Strait of Hormuz is reopened, while settling for rhetorical claims that it has ended Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. In reality, it has done neither; nor has it succeeded in ending the cooperation and interconnection between Iran and its allied regional forces and groups. Neither the US nor “Israel” has managed to achieve any of these aims.

It is accurate to compare today’s dual aggression with the Tripartite Aggression – the Suez Crisis – of 1956 against Egypt by Britain, France, and “Israel”. Although the British Empire had already significantly declined after World War II as an economic and colonial power, its formal end as an empire was effectively declared during the Suez War. Today, we are witnessing a similar scene with regard to the US and its empire.

At the regional level, two parallel processes are underway:

First: The “Greater Israel” project – along with the Abraham Accords, the so-called Arab NATO, and similar initiatives – is being brought to an end once and for all. The regimes in our region that have advanced along these paths are being harmed in proportion to their involvement; each additional step taken results in further damage, further decline in influence and presence, and reduced prospects for future weight.

Second: The core regional states – in light of their understanding of the new international balance and the direct threat posed by the American–“Israeli” project – are moving toward an objective convergence for self-defense. Specifically, this refers to what we have called the “quintet alliance” of the “outer ring states”: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan.

In Syria, the correct, principled, and ultimately salvational positioning lies in aligning with the emerging new world order—that is, supporting the unity of Syria and its people against both “Israeli” and American plans for destabilization and sabotage.

This also implicitly means adopting an economic model different from the (actually American) IMF and World Bank formulas—i.e., different from brutal economic liberalization. It entails prioritizing self-reliance and abandoning illusions of external funding and support, especially from the West, and even from the Gulf.

At the same time, it requires moving swiftly toward internal unification of the Syrian people, beginning with a national unity government with full powers, that includes the main political and social forces. Its primary task would be to work toward a comprehensive general national conference as a tool for the Syrian people to exercise their right to self-determination.

(النسخة العربية)