Iran – A Valiant, Heroic Nation Resisting Evil
Ashraf Jehangir Qazi

Heyhaat min al-Zilla(t) (Never! – to humiliation) – Imam Hussain.
Years ago, while discussing the world with friends, I declaimed the world needed to unite to stop the US, which had become a rogue superpower. Today, I am more convinced than ever that the world, including sensible and responsible Americans, urgently need to stop the two most dangerous and evil political leaders, Trump and Netanyahu, from murdering human civilisation. To do anything less is to be complicit in unprecedented evil.
A clerical regime is far from the best form of governance. A democratic republic should be superior in delivering political, economic, social and ethical goods and services. Moreover, the current conflict between Iran and the US-Israel is essentially an ethical and moral conflict. And yet in this instance the supposedly democratic bloc represents Evil, while the clerical regime represents the Good. The Iranian people who may or may not like their regime have made that abundantly clear.
The Chinese scholar, Yan Xuedong, observes in strategic competition the outcome “will turn not just on hard power but also on each country’s ability to command the moral high ground.” He was referring to the competition between the US and China. The current conflict between the US and Iran is part of the unfolding strategic competition between the US and China. This larger conflict pertains to the global order that will determine the fate of humanity, very likely within this century. Accordingly, the critical importance of the moral high ground applies to both the US-China and the US-Iran aspects of this conflict. What is this global order? It is essentially a Rules-Based Order (RBO). There are various versions of it. One is the UN Charter written after the failure of the League of Nations and the horrors of WWII. They included the Holocaust, as well as the fire-bombing of Tokyo and the nuclear bombing of the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Germany has never stopped atoning and pandering to Israel for its Jewish victims, and along with the rest of the West it has expiated its guilt at the expense of the Palestinians who had nothing to do with the Holocaust. In stark contrast to the West’s hypocritical atonement at an innocent people’s expense, the US has never even apologised for the mass murder of Japanese civilians. Noam Chomsky explained this is because the US believes “it only commits mistakes, never crimes”, even though its mistakes have devastated and decimated millions of human lives around the world. The innocence of the US, accordingly, remains untarnished, whatever its crimes. No wonder Chomsky predicted Trump would be far more dangerous than Hitler.
The UN Charter (UNC) states its purpose is to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war; to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights; to establish respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law; to promote progress in larger freedom; to ensure armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest; etc. It became part of the supreme law of the US through its Constitution’s treaty process. As a treaty ratified by the Senate, the UNC has the status of supreme law under the US Constitution requiring adherence to its principles, including the prohibition of the unauthorised use of force in international relations. Accordingly, every US President is bound by both international and domestic law to act in accordance with the purposes of the UNC. Any deliberate violation of this supreme law, constitutes a ‘capital crime’. Nevertheless, as Chomsky has documented, every single US President since the founding of the UN has violated this supreme law and committed a capital crime according to the US Constitution.This state criminality has progressively transformed the US from a rogue superpower into a failing and far more dangerous superpower.
The US interprets the RBO to mean the rules will be made by itself and the rest of the world shall follow them. The world has, accordingly, already been ‘saved the scourge of war’ even though the US has been perpetually at war of one kind or another since the founding of the UN. Only ‘Un-Americans’wickedly choose to blame the US for the consequences of its actions in defiance and violation of the UNC! Why did the US choose to make the UNC its supreme law when it had no intention of abiding by it? For the first decades of the UN, the US had disproportionate influence over the UN Security Council (UNSC) and did not need to use its veto power. It could utilise the assumed moral stature of the UN in support of its own strategies. The entry of Beijing into the UN at the expense of US-backed Taiwan, the rising global influence of the Soviet Union as a result of decolonisation and the Non-Aligned Movement, and the Vietnam War ultimately put an end to this farce.
In 1972, after the break-up of Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto convened a conference of Pakistani Ambassadors in Izmir to discuss the foreign policy of what was left of the country. In his address he made a profound observation that Pakistan needed the UN Charter as essential legal and diplomatic support for its survival, recovery and development strategies. Given today’s international situation, which has been created by an outlaw superpower whose President openly denigrates the UN and seeks to set up an alternate world order based on the whims of the mad mind of a bad man, the wisdom of the judicially assassinated Prime Minister (PM) of Pakistan half a century ago today rings truer than ever.
Two decades later, when I was in Beijing, a retired Chinese ambassador whom I had known from our days in Moscow told me China over its long history had learned why the Mandate of Heaven was sometimes bestowed upon its dynasties, and at other times withdrawn. After generations of study, research and discussion, Chinese scholars agreed on an answer. There were three types of challenges dynasties faced. The first were challenges that were so immediately threatening they needed to be faced without loss of time. The second were more complex challenges that needed time to understand in order to formulate and implement policies that successfully met them. The third were challenges that were of such a scale that sufficient time was required to equip a new generation to understand and deal with them. Chinese history accordingly demonstrated that whenever a dynasty was able to correctly categorise the challenges it faced, the Mandate of Heaven was bestowed upon it. Harvests were good, the people content, foreign invaders were repulsed, the unity of the country was preserved, and the dynasty prospered and endured. On the contrary, when a dynasty failed to correctly diagnose its challenges, the Mandate was withdrawn, harvests failed, famines spread, the people were disillusioned, civil wars ensued, invasions succeeded, the country was divided, and the dynasty disappeared.
The ambassador suggested Pakistan might wish to deliberate on which category the challenge of Kashmir belonged to so that it did not incur the costs of incorrectly categorising it and, instead, reaped the benefits of correct categorisation. Accordingly, when we come to assessing the Chinese response to the current US/Israeli assault on Iran, the perceptive analysis provided by the Chinese ambassador might retain its relevance. The remarks made by Bhutto and by the Chinese ambassador should be of interest to our policy advisers, decision-makers, opinion-makers, and especially our Millennial and Gen Z generations.
It has been said that for the US and Israel the problem with Iran is that it exists. A former Supreme Commander of American Forces in Europe, General Wesley Clerk, revealed long ago NATO’s plan to bring about regime change in seven Middle Eastern and Muslim countries culminating with Iran. Similarly, referring to his current assault on Iran, Netanyahu said it was the fulfilment of a dream he carried for 40 years. Nevertheless, until Trump 2.0, Israel had not got US approval for regime change in Iran because of the challenge involved. So why has Trump finally caved in? The answer lies in the Epstein files, the complete content of which is apparently with Israel. He wouldn’t last a day if they were published.
In the early 1950s, after the Shah of Iran fled his country as a result of a popular uprising led by the democratically elected PM Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh, the CIA and the British MI-6 conspired with the Iranian military to have him removed and the Shah restored. Mosaddegh’s unforgiveable crime was to have asked British Petroleum (BP) for half the revenue from Iran’s oil exports whereas BP backed by the British government and the CIA was only prepared to offer two percent! A lesson had to be taught to Middle Eastern oil producing countries on who owned their oil. Later in 1979, President Carter invaded Iran shortly after the Islamic Revolution when Iranian students laid siege to the US embassy in Tehran and seized shredded documents that were meticulously reassembled and published in more than 50 volumes. They detailed US policies over decades including plans for a coup against the new Islamic government and the reinstalling of the Shah’s regime. The student seizure of the embassy led to Carter’s invasion of Iran, which ended in disaster and the end of his political career.
Ever since, the US has actively shared the Israeli goal of destroying the Islamic Revolution, most blatantly during the eight-year Iran-Iraq war. Saddam Hussein was supported by the US with intelligence and diplomatic assistance even after he used poison gas against Iranian soldiers and his own Kurds. Later, the US shot down an Iranian civilian aircraft, murdering more than 200 civilian passengers. Just another forgettable crime against humanity! Nevertheless, it compelled an exhausted Khomeini to call off the war.
No sooner had the US facilitated Saddam’s victory than it laid a trap to entice him into an assault on Kuwait. Why? The best explanation was a popular car sticker in the US at the time that read: “Kick their a** and get our gas!” Iraq’s gas was, of course, America’s! Iran’s too. In fact Middle East gas – of friend and foe alike – was America’s gas. An oil rich superpower like the US seeking global hegemony may not need foreign gas for itself as much as it needs to deny it to potential rivals. The US thirst for other people’s gas and other critical resources is insatiable, requiring it to forever be not only the strongest country in the world, but also the most violent. No wonder Rap Brown, the Black Panthers leader in the 1970s who became a Muslim and was murdered in his sleep by US undercover agents memorably said: “Violence is as American as apple pie!”
Much the same about the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) ‘Iran nuclear deal’ negotiated in 2015 between Iran and the 5+1, i.e. the Permanent Members of the UNSC plus Germany. The JCPOA was supported by UNSC Resolution 2231, which made adherence to it mandatory under international law. Iran agreed to reduce its enriched uranium stockpile by 98 percent and limit further enrichment to 3.67 percent, which ensured it could only be used for civilian purposes. It also agreed to reduce the number of its centrifuges and to continuous, intensive and intrusive inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iran, accordingly, made huge concessions despite the nuclear threat it faced from Israel’s undeclared and illegal nuclear weapons stockpile. There was in fact no need for the JCPOA as Iran had already subscribed to the Arab plan to establish a Middle East Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone, which was opposed by the US and Israel. Iran’s decision, however, was in line with Khomeini’s fatwa that it was un-Islamic to develop weapons that could harm the whole of humanity. (Our Ulema are more pragmatic.)
Nevertheless, Trump walked out of the JCPOA in 2018 and hit Iran with ‘snap back’ sanctions as punishment for his own malfeasance! In response, Iran increased its enrichment to 60 percent, still far below what is required for a nuclear bomb. It also curtailed IAEA inspections. The pathetic IAEA duly accused Iran of illegally going back on its commitments under the JCPOA, effectively ignoring Trump’s shredding of it. Prior to the current US/Israel invasion of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei had gone out of his way to accommodate Trump’s illogical and illegal demands in talks with the US in Qatar and Turkey. Trump publicly conceded progress in the talks. In fact he used negotiations not to make a deal but to deceive his opponent that war could be avoided. A Qatari diplomat who attended the negotiations later disclosed how his country was deceived by Trump’s use of negotiations as preparation for war.
Earlier, Israel set an example for him to follow by murdering Hamas negotiators in Doha. The murder of much of the Iranian political leadership, and of 170 schoolgirls between the ages of seven and 11 describes the Satanic evil to which Trump and Netanyahu have descended. They have set a possible precedent for future conflicts. Just as despicable was Trump’s blaming Iran for murdering its own schoolgirls when his own Tomahawk missiles had done the deed. And many in the US including the military see him as the Second Coming of Jesus Christ! The Muslim world needs to find its Salahuddin Ayubi again.
As for the state of the conflict, at the time of writing it is impossible to predict the outcome of a massively unequal conflict that has so many counterbalancing factors in play that a simple logical and factual analysis can provide little guidance. Nevertheless, Iran’s far-sighted planning and its heroic resistance and resolve have stunned the world by apparently bringing the world’s mightiest and most arrogant military force to its knees. However, the fog of war along with the changing strategic calculations and perceptions of countries that can make a difference make prediction a mug’s game. What impact will the closure of the Hormuz Straits and the ‘obliteration’ of Kharg Island have on the Iranian and regional economy? On the global economic, financial and energy situation? On the mid-term elections in the US? On Trump’s postponed visit to China? On Taiwan? On the future of the UN? On the future of NATO? On the future of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa)? On the future of US-European relations? Etc.
Conversely, what impact might China’s evaluation of its best options have on the course of the conflict? On the future of Iran? On the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and the Arab Street versus the Arab Elite? On the possibility of another Arab Spring? On relations between Pakistan and all its neighbours? On political stability in Pakistan? For the immediate future, however, the main questions are how long the US and Israel can continue their invasion despite the callous, lying, incoherent and ever changing statements of Trump? How long can Iran bear the crushing assault of the world’s mightiest military? How does China see its short and longer term stakes in the outcome of the conflict?
China has serious longer term stakes in the outcome. They determine the strategy of the US Deep State that has repeatedly designated China as its most feared adversary and challenge to its global hegemony. Unless the American political system checks the lunatic but lethal MAGA/Deep State/Zionist/Trump agenda next November, this US goal is likely to be pursued no matter what the longer-term consequences. These could be a fatal acceleration towards midnight on the Doomsday Clock.
Donald Trump embodies the ancient Greek saying: “Those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.” He and his MAGA base have come to define the malady of a whole nation – and that too the most powerful on earth. This malady, moreover, has been developing since the end of WWII. It now appears to be reaching an inflection point that will determine whether the US brings about an Armageddon or allows its presumed better self to finally prevail over its demonic one.
The war with Iran inevitably targets China and China’s response will also have a determining impact. The rest of the world needs to find ways of coming together not just in support of China’s principled and farsighted moderation, but also to save humanity from the perversity that has become so deeply entrenched in the domestic politics and external strategies of the US. The embodiment of capitalism unconstrained has become the embodiment of evil unconstrained. So how does China see this conflict in terms of its critical interests? The prevalent view is China historically does not make other nations’ wars its own, and this applies to friendly, neutral and adversary countries alike. This so-called ‘No Ally’ strategy is seen as China’s unique genius since it enables it to develop friendly, cooperative and mutually beneficial relations with other countries without incurring obligations that may not suit its convenience or interest.
The largely unchallenged abuse of the US military and economic might has fed its sense of global entitlement at significant cost to the rest of humanity. Accordingly, its soft power is rapidly declining, especially relative to the rise of China’s economic and military power as well as its No Ally strategy. This strategy has been institutionalised in a whole range of international and bilateral organisations and forums that provide a range of attractive alternative options to developing and developed countries at no onerous cost to them – provided, of course, their governments choose to govern responsibly in the interests of their own people, and do not fall prey to US inducements and pressures. US global policy today is essentially a technologically updated neo-imperialist project that is taking the Global South to the doomsday abyss, and perhaps the rest of the world too.
The US/Israeli illegal and genocidal aggression against Iran, according to Robert Jackson who was the US lead prosecutor during the Nuremberg trials, would constitute “the crime of all crimes” as well as “the supreme international crime because it contains within itself the evil of all other crimes.” China’s No Ally strategy may therefore no longer be correctly interpreted as warranting a largely hands-off strategy. As a global player economy, China has to secure its globally spread supply chains. This requires it to retain credibility with the Global South and further abroad. The US, egged on by its hubris and by its Israeli-owned President, is determined to undermine the credibility of China as a check on its global hegemony. Accordingly, the US/Israeli assault and decapitation against Iran and their destruction of its economy, not forgetting the continuing genocide in Gaza, are the opening salvos of a War for a New World Order that effectively dispenses with the UN and condemns the Global South to servitude. The US knows it cannot militarily defeat China anywhere close to China. But it believes it can and must economically and strategically target China’s more distant supply chains in order to progressively compel it to abandon any challenge to its global hegemony, and to find its place within a US-dominated world order for the foreseeable future.
China, however, is determined never to suffer another century of humiliation. The effectiveness of its assistance to Pakistan last year during the conflict with India was of regional significance. The effectiveness of its assistance to Iran in the current conflict will be of global significance. Western coverage of the conflict is, by and large, blatantly biased since it is an integral part of the propaganda of a war-mongering global power. However, thanks to the foresight of China and the heroism of Iran there appears at the moment a more than even chance of Good prevailing over Evil. Ultimately, the outcome of the conflict will depend on China’s own assessment of its capacity and stake in it. It will not start something it cannot finish. Nor will it refrain from doing what it can and must.
The war has now turned into an economic war, with the US and Israel determined to destroy the oil and energy infrastructure of Iran to ensure their perpetual control of the energy resources of the Middle East. This will have catastrophic implications for the poor of the Global South. In Pakistan more than half the population will face the prospect of life below the poverty line, a situation that will reduce the country to utter chaos. And its ruling elites are expected by their benefactors to connive in the destruction of their country!
There is speculation about the role Pakistan is playing on behalf of Trump and MBS to persuade Iran to open the Straits of Hormuz in return for some easing of sanctions, and maybe some compensation to rebuild its energy infrastructure and, of course, agreeing to restore its nuclear commitments under the defunct JCPOA. Russia appears opposed to any such deal that would impact on the Ukraine situation. While China has a significant stake in the reopening of the Hormuz Straits, it knows it is the ultimate target of the US assault on Iran. Accordingly, Pakistan needs to coordinate with China instead of countries aiming at regime change in Tehran and, possibly, the destruction of Iran. The cost for Pakistan of progressively forfeiting the trust of China will be existential. The favour of the US will at best be temporary. The US will always prefer India over Pakistan, and it will require Pakistan to accept that or face severe consequences. Accordingly, for Pakistan to continue attempting a strategic balance between the US and China is nonsensical or worse. Similarly, simultaneously offering verbal political support to Iran while warning that it will protect the Gulf countries against Iran despite their permitting assaults on Iran from their territory, only highlights a moral and strategic bankruptcy.
So what is to be done? There is plenty that absolutely needs to be done, especially at home, which will not be done. Many have spelled out wish lists that are sensible but will not become priorities for obvious reasons. As for external priorities we should try to persuade the UNSC and UN General Assembly (UNGA) to inform the US that its war against Iran is unacceptable as its global knock-on effects are likely to be unmanageable, and very likely catastrophic, especially for the Global South, and in particular, Pakistan. Trump is unlikely to respond positively for reasons already stated. Similarly, European leaders are unlikely to have the moral courage and strategic vision to break with him. Their fear and hatred of Putin and Russia will keep them chained to the US despite their contempt for Trump. At the very least a resolution of the UNGA calling upon the US to do the needful should be adopted by an overwhelming majority. Alternately, the UNGA could convene in Geneva and adopt a resolution calling upon the UN Secretary General to consider the possibility of shifting the headquarters of the UN from New York and relocating it to an appropriate place outside the US, possibly Geneva, which was the headquarters of the UN’s predecessor, the League of Nations. Unfortunately, this is also very unlikely as it will be argued that a perverse US majority in the UN may perversely rally round this perverse President. Nevertheless, some such exercise should be considered if only to make US public opinion aware that the utter contempt displayed by the US for the UN renders it an unfit location for its headquarters, and indeed for any of its agencies, etc. The messaging would be more important than the current feasibility of such proposals although the credibility of the messaging would depend on the seriousness with which alternatives to the US are considered.
The present world order, such as it is, has no moral underpinning. If the UN cannot be reformed, decentralised regional alternatives may have to be considered to keep the peace and preserve civilisation. Power without morality must always be a loser. That is a transcending moral imperative, whatever the circumstances. A superpower or any other that chooses to be an international menace must be treated as an international pariah. That is the minimum we owe ourselves, our children and theirs. None of this will, however, happen without organisation, struggle, sacrifice, and a moral core within our collective being.
To cite bilateral agreements against the legal obligations of the UNC, and to publicly insist a Jewish and Christian Zionist war of extinction against a Muslim neighbour is not Pakistan’s war, reveals the state of our country.