Iran is to blame for the Mid-east crisis
Writing in defence of the Iran nuclear deal, Barack Obama insisted that it was never intended to solve every problem in the region. Iran, he said, engages in “support for terrorism and threats toward Israel and its neighbours”. But the fact that these things have only got worse since the signing of the accord implies that legitimising the regime, focusing international attention on uranium enrichment and lifting economic sanctions, has allowed Iran to expand its reach. It’s no wonder that 62 per cent of Israelis support tearing up the deal, or that a similar percentage fear a war is likely. From their perspective, and that of many others in the Middle East, Iran is the proximate cause of tension, and the deal might even have made things worse.
Their case is made by the astonishing build-up of the Iranian presence in the Levant. Tehran’s backing of Bashar al-assad amounts to an endorsement of war crimes, and the confluence of Iranian, Russian and Syrian regime interests is one of the most cynical alliances in history. It might not last. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has spoken of “co-ordination” between Israel and Russia to ensure that their weapons don’t accidentally clash in Syrian airspace, which makes sense. Vladimir Putin wants Assad to stay in power to maintain a Russian presence on the Mediterranean, not to help Iran build itself a little empire – so why would he stand in the way of Israel defending itself ? And that, to be absolutely clear, is what Israel is trying to do. The Iranians are reported to have moved advanced weapons to Syria and Hizbollah has increased its influence in Lebanon.
In short, Donald Trump’s decision to quit the Iran deal makes greater sense the closer one lives to Iran. The promise of nuclear peace for the next few years means little, on balance, to those facing terrorism and war in the present. There is a debate raging over Mr Trump’s game plan: perhaps the goal is to force a new deal – in much the same dramatic way that North Korea was brought to the negotiating table – that includes limiting Iran’s missile production and ending its export of terrorism. Ultimately, even if Iran was following the nuclear deal to the letter, it broke the spirit of it in many other regards. It is Iran’s militarism and adventurism that has brought the Middle East to this dangerous juncture.