Mediaboss Marketing

Many Western leaders press allies and partners not to hit back hard when their enemies attack. After the foiled Iranian attack on Israel last month, for example, U.S. President Joe Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take the win instead of retaliating. Ukraine has been similarly pressured by its Western supporters not to strike targets in Russiasuch as oil refinerieseven if their unobstructed functioning directly aids Russia on the battlefield. Restraint has become the Wests guiding strategic principle, seemingly preserving a modicum of international stability by keeping wars from escalating out of control.

Many Western leaders press allies and partners not to hit back hard when their enemies attack. After the foiled Iranian attack on Israel last month, for example, U.S. President Joe Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take the win instead of retaliating. Ukraine has been similarly pressured by its Western supporters not to strike targets in Russiasuch as oil refinerieseven if their unobstructed functioning directly aids Russia on the battlefield. Restraint has become the Wests guiding strategic principle, seemingly preserving a modicum of international stability by keeping wars from escalating out of control.

Even if Israel and Ukraine dont heed them, such requests to practice restraint are dangerous. They incentivize the attacker to be more aggressive, not less. By conveying to Russia or Iranand by extension, Chinathat Western partners will be pressed to absorb the attack and fight a strictly defensive war on their own territory, Western policymakers achieve the opposite of what their risk aversion intends: They elevate the risk of a widening war. They are making aggression relatively cost-free for imperial powers, to be fought only on the attacked countrys land or thwarted by expensive defensive means. Paradoxically, restraining allies that have been attacked is destabilizing; the Western attempt to control escalation ultimately makes it more likely.

Take, for example, the recent case of Irans onslaught on Israel. Deterrence clearly failed as Iran directly attacked Israel for the first time using a substantial and layered package of missiles and drones. Iran chose to attack despite a standing Israeli policy to punish every attack on its territory and citizensand despite the effective denial technologies fielded by Israel. It was the largest drone and missile attack in recent history, more substantial than anything Russia has launched against Ukraine in a single night.

But whereas deterrence failed, Irans missiles and drones were almost completely intercepted by Israel with the aid of the United States, Britain, France, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Only a few missiles fell on two Israeli air bases, causing minimal damage; one civilian was wounded by shrapnel in the Negev desert. Such a failure should cause relief and be a source of celebration. After all, what could have been horrific devastation in Israel turned into an embarrassing turkey shoot for Iran. Punishment for such a failed attack, the argument goes, was not warranted: Defense was a success, the strategic interaction was over. Restraint ought to prevail.

Undoubtedly, the restraint advocated by many in the West is appealing. It may bestow a veneer of moral superiority to a country willing to suffer attacks without responding in kind. Tit-for-tat, after all, seems childish, and revenge even worse. In the case of a successful defense such as Israels interception of Irans missiles, retaliation may even look unnecessary.

But erecting the air defense necessary to deny such attacks comes at great cost, and the shield is not perfect. The resources necessary to develop, deploy, and operate a complex, multilayered defensive system capable of intercepting ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones are substantial. Irans attack probably cost it around $100 million, whereas the bill for Israels defense during that single night probably reached something in the $1 billion range. Israel is estimated to have incurred more than half of these costs, with most of the rest borne by the United States. The fiscal equation clearly favors the attacker.

Beyond the sheer expense, there is the unquantifiable cost in potentially greater insecurity. The more successfully a defensive system protects a countryeven as it fails to deter the attacker in the first placethe less credible the threat of punishing retaliation will be. This invites the attacker to strike again, while the defender is pressured to absorb the attacks without responding in kind. Given how cheap drones and even ballistic missiles have become, Iran can seek to saturate Israeli defenses and increase the likelihood that missiles get through. Alternatively, too many attacks could bankrupt the target. And yet, Biden seems to think that one failed Iranian attack will deter further assaults. Israel demonstrated a remarkable capacity to defend against and defeat even unprecedented attacks, he said in a statement, sending a clear message to its foes that they cannot effectively threaten the security of Israel.

The Biden administrations approach to Russias attack on Ukraine is analogous. U.S. defense official Celeste Wallander recently said that Ukraine holds itself to the highest standards of observing the laws of armed conflict. Although the laws of war say no such thing, the administration considers Russian oil refineries out of bounds for Ukraine to strike, with the Ukrainians supposed to limit themselves to the exchange of fire on the front line. Behind the moralizing, the administration seeks to control any escalatory dynamics by holding the Ukrainians backalbeit not entirely successfully. The logic or hope behind this reasoning is that a restrained Ukraine will limit Russian escalation and contain the war. A more aggressive Ukraine that strikes deep inside Russia, or so this argument goes, will only result in greater Russian escalation against Ukraine and perhaps even against countries supporting Ukraine. The unmistakable message to Moscow is that Washington and other Western capitals would rather see Ukraine under military duress than Russia under attack. The same thing holds for the red lines the West imposes not on Ukraine but on itselfGerman Chancellor Olaf Scholz refusing to provide Ukraine with Taurus long-range cruise missiles, for exampleall of which emboldens Russia even further.

The Biden administrations obsession with restraining front-line allies and partners is misplaced. Taking offensive actions off the tableby not providing the appropriate weapons, by sending them under the strict condition that they only be used on Ukraines territory, or by telling Israel to take the winis highly likely to produce the opposite of the intended effect. By limiting Russias and Irans risks and costs, it lowers the bar for further aggression.

The repercussions of this faulty Western understanding of escalation go far beyond Europe and the Middle East. With its pressure on Israel and Ukraine, Washington is sending a signal to China that a potential attack on Taiwan will be met only by defensive measures such as intercepting incoming missiles and that force will only be wielded along a thin line of contact. Maybe Taiwan will be told to take the win if not much damage is done in an initial Chinese strike or that the highest standards require it to refrain from striking Chinese ports or logistical nodes.

It is dangerous to believe that a regional equilibrium will be maintained simply by pouring a lot of money into defensive systems and denial technologies. Front-line states must have the abilityand support of their alliesto strike the enemy behind the apparent safety of its borders and not just absorb its attacks. For deterrence to be restored or strengthened, these states have to be able to retaliate with offensive actions.

Stability does not arise exclusively out of the ability to parry the enemys blows, but out of the credible promise of hurting him back.

Read the original:
Biden's Escalation Fears on Russia and Iran Have Dangerous Consequences - Foreign Policy

April 17 marked Ayatollah Ali Khameneis 85th birthday and coincided with a critical juncture for Iran as tensions with Israel escalated at historic proportions. While details regarding Khameneis physical state remain confidential, unprecedented remarks from the head of the Supreme Leaders medical team stirred speculation about Khameneis true condition.

In an interview, Alireza Marandi stated, God has shown great favor to the Islamic Republic and all of us by keeping him [Khamenei] in good health He is remarkably fit, defying his age.

Broadcasting these comments, rather than reassuring the public, did the opposite, renewing questions about potential successors.

The Iranian ruling system claims to be both Islamic and a republic, with many nominally elected offices. However, the March 1 elections had the lowest participation rate in the history of the Islamic Republic, with only 41 percent of eligible voters taking part. The wholesale disqualification of reformist and moderate candidates by the ultra-conservative Guardian Council, tasked with vetting candidates, contributed to an unparalleled surge for the most extreme faction within the Iranian system.

For the first time, the top three elected members of parliament in Tehran were from an ultra-conservative group known as Paydari or the Steadfastness Front. The groups spiritual leader, Ayatollah Taqi Mesbah Yazdi, who died in 2021, argued that elections in Iran only occur because the countrys ruler permits them and that the leader can endorse or reject the peoples choices.

Mesbah followers are staunch advocates for the enforcement of religious norms, particularly concerning women, support restricting internet access, and harbor strong anti-American tendencies. Their opposition to any U.S. foothold in Iran or advancement of modernity stems from a belief that such developments would render their ideology obsolete. In this aspect, they align closely with the views of Khamenei.

Historically, representatives from Tehran are the most influential in parliament. It remains to be seen whether the ultra-conservative faction will secure control of the Presidium, or whether an opposing faction of conservatives, led by the current parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, will prevail. The composition of the Presidium, which consists of a chairman, two vice-chairmen, six secretaries, and three observers, will be determined in June through elections within the parliament. The Presidium has a long list of duties related to the management of the parliament. However, in practical terms, the chairman plays a pivotal role in providing direction to the body and wields significant power to advance his agenda.

The March 1 elections, in addition to choosing a new parliament, selected 88 clerics who comprise the Assembly of Experts, which is responsible for choosing a new supreme leader should Khamenei leave the role. Considering Khameneis age and that the assembly serves for eight years, it is quite possible that it will get to exercise that responsibility.

As with candidates for the Assembly, the Guardian Council made a systematic effort to purge moderates. Election of a supreme leader requires a two-thirds majority, thus an influential moderate could potentially assemble a faction to block the conservatives preferred candidate. This rationale led to the disqualification of Irans former moderate president, an old guard of the revolution, Hassan Rouhani.

According to a March 2 BBC Persian survey of 30 Iranian experts, there is an overwhelming belief that Khameneis second son, Mojtaba, will be his successor. However, I would challenge this prevailing viewpoint.

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the 1979 revolution that overturned the Shah, repeatedly denounced hereditary rule as equivalent to an illegitimate monarchy. This view was expressed in a 21-volume collection of speeches, messages, interviews, decrees, religious permissions, and letters, known as Sahifeyeh Imam Khomeini.

Khamenei, who succeeded Khomeini in 1989, has also characterized hereditary governance as contrary to Islamic principles. On several occasions, including in a speech in July 2023, he stated that dictatorship and hereditary government are not Islamic (though, given Irans situation, labeling dictatorship as non-Islamic raised eyebrows).

On March 1, 2024, Ayatollah Mahmoud Mohammadi Araghi, a member of the Assembly of Experts, revealed, The news reached the leader that the experts are investigating the case of Mojtabas leadership. The leader said, What you are doing raises suspicions about the leaderships hereditary issue. So the investigation was not allowed. On another occasion, when they sought permission from the leader to investigate a person related to him, he responded, No, draw a line under this issue.

Supporters of Mojtaba Khameneis succession argue that Shiite Muslim tradition allows hereditary leadership in the concept of imamate. But religious experts counter that imams are chosen by God, while the supreme leader is elected by representatives of the people, and thus cannot be hereditary.

Those who do not believe Mojtaba will succeed his father also highlight another crucial issue: The system could face accusations of nepotism. Even if untrue, skepticism would likely persist, raising concerns that the Islamic system dismantled a hereditary monarchy and now wants to replace it with its own hereditary system under an Islamic guise.

In the view of this analyst, two other individuals are more likely successors to Khamenei.

Incumbent President Ebrahim Raisi has been tested over the years and has proven his unwavering loyalty to the system. From 1988, when at age 28 he was involved in mass executions of government opponents, until 2019, when Khamenei chose him as head of the judiciary, Raisi has consistently been obedient to the deep state.

Despite a setback in the 2017 presidential election, when he lost to Rouhani, Raisi garnered significant attention from Khamenei and the military-security apparatus. This led to his return to the political stage in 2021, with the system orchestrating his election by disqualifying every plausible candidate from the moderate/reformist camp.

The plan likely aimed to create a social base for him, showcasing his widespread acceptance in society. Some might argue that his presidency has instead revealed his incompetence, rendering him unsuitable for the countrys highest role. But many commentators have said that no one currently possesses the necessary personality and charisma for that position. Iran expert Hossein Bastani maintains that apart from the fact that public acceptance of the next leader is crucial for the Iranian government, it cannot be denied that the position of each potential leadership candidate is highly unstable within government circles. In other words, even the most prominent clerics whose names have been circulated in the succession competition lack credibility among insiders.

In fact, a figure like Raisi might be ideal for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), which would most likely shape Irans domestic and foreign policies behind the scenes in the absence of Khamenei.

It is worth recalling what Khamenei conveyed to the Assembly of Experts seeking to elect him after Khomeinis death in 1989.

Apart from the fact that I myself am not really worthy of this position and I know this, maybe you gentlemen also know my leadership will be superficial, not real leadership, he said. For many gentlemen, my words do not have the validity of the leaders words. So, what kind of leadership will this be?

The IRGC and the security-intelligence apparatus are the pillars that supported and emboldened Khamenei. The next leader will likely be unable to wield power without their full support.

The new Presidium of the Assembly of Experts which includes the chairman, two vice-chairmen, and two secretaries, could also be pivotal in determining Irans third leader. It appears that Alireza Arafi, 67, a member of the new Assembly, stands a strong chance of becoming the chairman of the body.

Arafis ascent in Irans power structure began in 2001 following his appointment by Khamenei as the head of the World Center for Islamic Sciences (currently called Al-Mustafa International University).Its aim is to spread Shiite teachings and ideology globally through branches abroad. In 2016, Arafi was elected as one of seven members of the Supreme Council of Qom Seminary, an organization of Islamic scholars and experts, which is responsible for policy-making and macro-planning of seminaries across Iran. That same year, Arafi, who also served as the Friday prayer leader of Qom, a position appointed by Khamenei, was elected by the Supreme Council of Qom Seminary as the director of all seminaries across the countryone of the highest positions in Irans religious hierarchy.

Khamenei, who had previously hailed Arafi as an original, intellectual and resourceful jurist, remarked, (the right sat in its place).

This election, coupled with Khameneis commendation of Arafi, further bolstered his standing in Irans power structure. In 2018, in another significant stride, Khamenei appointed Arafi as a member of the Guardian Council.

Building on his successes within the system, Arafi secured the top position among the members from Tehran province in the recent elections for the Assembly of Experts, positioning him as likely to lead the presidium. Arafis name has been circulating as one of the potential successors of Khamenei since at least 2016.

The only flaw in his resume lies in the color of his turban, which unlike Khomeinis and Khameneis, is not black. Black turbans are traditionally worn by Sayyids, who claim to be descendants of the Prophet Mohammad and Imam Ali, the first Shiite Imam. However, its worth noting that Hossein Ali Montazeri, a cleric initially appointed Khomeinis successor, was also a white turban cleric.

Shahir Shahidsaless is an Iranian Canadian political analyst and freelance journalist writing about Iranian domestic and foreign affairs, the Middle East, and the U.S. foreign policy in the region. He is the co-author of Iran and the United States: An Insiders View on the Failed Past and the Road to Peace. He is a contributor to several websites with a focus on the Middle East. He tweets @SShahidsaless.

Original post:
Who Will Be Iran's Next Leader? Not Khamenei's Son Stimson Center - Stimson Center

Just days before hed premiere his new film The Seed of the Sacred Fig in Competition at the Cannes Film Festival, director Mohammad Rasoulof has been sentenced to eight years in prison and flogging in Iran. Hell also be subjected to a fine and the confiscation of property. The filmmaker has run afoul of the theocratic government there for years, and theres some indication the timing of this extremely harsh sentence is coercion to remove the film from the festival altogether.

Its easy to see why the authoritarian regime might be scared of Rasoulofs latest work. The Seed of the Sacred Fig Tree is literally about a judge for the Revolutionary Court in Tehran dealing with the fallout from the nationwide protests that have swept the country in recent years, and he particularly succumbs to paranoia when his gun disappears.

The 51-year-old director has been hit with a severe sentence, before, however. Making features since 2002, Rasoulof was first arrested in 2010 for supposedly filming without a permit an offense for which he received a six-year prison sentence, later knocked down to one year. After he returned from a trip abroad in 2017, the authorities in Iran confiscated his passport, forbidding him from leaving the country.

Hes received other sentences since, which were deferred due to the Covid pandemic, when Iran actually released over 50,000 prisoners to prevent the viruss spread. When he received another charge, for allegedly undermining Irans national security because of making his 2017 film A Man of Integrity, which won the top prize in Un Certain Regard, he received an outpouring of support from other filmmakers, such as Asghar Farhadi and Jafar Panahi. Not allowed to leave Iran for years, a coalition of filmmakers petitioned the government to allow him to attend Cannes in 2023, where he had been invited to participate in the Un Certain Regard jury.

His next film, There Is No Evil, about capital punishment in Iran, won the Golden Bear at Berlin. He filmed the entire movie in secret.

According to Iranian journalist Mansour Jahani, this particularly harsh sentence against Rasoulof is expected to be executed soon. However, he is not yet in prison as of publication time.

On X, Rasoulofs lawyer Babak Paknia wrote, as translated by Jahani, According to the verdict issued by the 29th branch of the Islamic Revolution Court of Iran, Mohammad Rasoulof was sentenced to 8 years of imprisonment (5 years applicable), flogging, fine, and confiscation of property. This ruling was confirmed in the 36th branch of the Court of Appeals and now the case has been sent to enforcement.

In a follow-up tweet, Paknia added, The main reason for issuing this sentence is signing statements and making films and documentaries, which in the courts opinion, these actions are examples of collusion with the intention of committing a crime against the countrys security.

IndieWire has reached out to the Cannes Film Festival for comment.

See the original post:
Iran Sentences Director Mohammad Rasoulof to 8 Years in Prison and Flogging Days Before His New Film Premieres ... - IndieWire

After weeks of being held in Iran and promises that the crew of the seized containership MSC Aries would be released, the governments of Portugal, India, and Pakistan confirmed that the first seven crewmembers had left the ship. Iran last week had said all the crew would be free to leave if the captain joined them and now it is being reported the crew will be released when their contractual obligations are completed.

Portugal as the flag state of the containership confirmed that seven people of the 24 still aboard the vessel had departed. They said specifically that the first release consisted of five Indian citizens, one Filipino, and one Estonian, who was the sole European Union citizen on board.

The Portuguese government welcomes this development, for which it had strongly advocated for. Nonetheless, it reiterates to the Iranian Government that international law requires the immediate release of the remaining crew members and of the ship MSC Aries. Portugal will continue to make every effort to ensure that these international obligations are fully met, the Portuguese Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Indias embassy in Iran posted a message on X (Twitter) confirming that its five citizens had departed Iran last night and were making their way home to India. Previously, they had arranged for the sole cadet, a female, to travel home to India where she arrived on April 19, six days after the vessel was seized.

The consulate previously said that it had been able to arrange a visit to the crew and that they were in good health. They are continuing to call for the immediate release of the additional 11 Indian citizens aboard the MSC Aries.

The Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs said that its one crewmember was expected to arrive back in the Philippines today, Friday, May 10. They said they are working for the release of the three remaining Filipinos aboard the ship. We hope for their eventual speedy return to their homes and families, todays statement said.

The vessel also has crewmembers from Russia and Pakistan. Iran had promised the Pakistan Foreign Ministry that it would repatriate its crewmembers while it was planning for a state visit to the country. However, there was no word on when these crewmembers might be released.

Iran reiterated its assertion that the MSC Aries broke international maritime law. They accused the vessel of turning off its AIS transmissions while in Iranian territorial waters and endangering the safety of navigation. The official position is that the vessel is detained under judicial review.

The seizure is widely seen as a retaliatory move against Israel coming shortly before Iran unleashed missiles and drones targeting Israel. The MSC Aries operates under a long-term charter to MSC but is owned by affiliates of Zodiac Maritime in which Eyal Ofer is the lead investor.

See more here:
Seven Crewmembers from Seized MSC Aries Depart Iran - The Maritime Executive

The chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says Iran has become so powerful that it fearlessly attacks the heart of the global arrogance.

The fact that the Islamic Republic attacks the heart of the [global] arrogance fearlessly and with the knowledge of all-round enmity and consequences shows the peoples power of faith, resistance, will and progress, Major General HosseinSalamisaid in Semnan Province on Monday.

Referring to Iran's recent Operation True Promise against Israel, Salami said, "By relying on the strength and power of the zealous Iranian nation, the operation was not carried out as a surprise, but by taking responsibility for it and broadcasting its images."

"From the very first moments of the operation, Iranians took to the streets to express their support for the retaliatory attack and the IRGC," he stressed.

On April 14, Iran fired morethan 300 dronesand missiles at military bases in the Israeli-occupied territories.

The large-scale attack, dubbed Operation True Promise, was a response to a terrorist Israeli raid against Irans consulate in the Syrian capital Damascus that killed 13 people, including seven IRGC military advisors.

Salami also noted that Iran achieved success whenever it faced obstacles and sanctions.

The power of the Islamic Republic establishment today is the outcome of resistance and progress in an endless war in multiple forms with different countries of the world, he said.

The Iranian nation turned sanctions into an opportunity for advancement in various fields, the IRGC chief added.

Salami noted that, "The enemy's idea of sanctioning Iran was to paralyze and make it surrender, however, our nation turned the sanction into an opportunity for progress, and this power's great achievements have been displayed to the world in various fields today."

The IRGC chief asserted that the key to overcoming sanctions and problems is "being with the people."

The United States under former president Donald Trump reinstated crippling sanctions on Iran after unilaterally walking out of the 2015 nuclear deal in May 2018, despite Irans full compliance with the terms of the agreement, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

In defiance of the illegal sanctions, Iran has made great strides in different areas and has become self-reliant in many sectors.

Read more:
Iran's authority result of resistance, advances in endless wars: IRGC chief - Press TV