THE martyrdom of Ismail Haniyeh, alongside the earlier loss of his sons, nephews and niece, is profoundly tragic, eliciting condemnation and mourning from the entire Muslim world and all who value humanity globally. Haniyeh, a prominent leader of the Gaza Strip, waged a relentless struggle against Israeli occupation on political and military fronts. However, Iran and the Muslim world must not let emotions drive them to impulsive actions. It is crucial to avoid providing any pretext to Israel, the USA, or the Western world to justify actions that could further harm Iran, akin to the devastation seen in Afghanistan.
Our memories remain vivid when George Bush Jr. issued an ultimatum to the Taliban in Afghanistan to hand over Osama Bin Laden to the USA, who was accused of masterminding the 9/11 attacks and other high-profile assaults on American interests globally. The Taliban, compelled by their tradition of hospitality and their readiness to sacrifice their lives to protect a guest who had sought refuge with them, refused. This defiance enraged the USA and its allies, leading to a devastating attack on Afghanistan, the wounds of which remain fresh and painful. Now they have forced Iran to fall into a similar position expecting similar action and similar reaction.
It is widely speculated that the CIA of the USA, MI-5 of the UK and Mossad of Israel have strategically chosen the timing, event and place to eliminate their sworn enemy with great intelligence. For the USA, Israel and the Western world, Iran is viewed as an evil country under an oppressive regime. They are wary of Iran’s pursuit of nuclear enrichment, believing it has achieved weapons-grade uranium. Additionally, Iran’s national pride, the religious revolution since 1979 and its support of various militant factions have solidified its position as a formidable adversary to the USA, West and especially Israel.
Iran’s leverage extends to Hezbollah in Lebanon; in Iraq, the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), including groups like Kata’ib Hezbollah, Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq and the Badr Organization; in Syria, Liwa Fatemiyoun and Liwa Zainebiyoun; in Yemen, the Houthi movement (Ansar Allah); and in Palestine, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Additionally, in Bahrain, Iran supports various small militant groups involved in anti-government activities. This extensive network of influence and support has positioned Iran as the number one enemy to the USA, West and especially Israel, which views Iran’s backing of these groups as a direct threat to its survival.
The timing of the attack on Iran coincides with the inauguration of the new president, who succeeded (former) President Ebrahim Raisi, who died in a helicopter crash. Some conspiracy theories suggest this crash was orchestrated by Israel in retaliation for missile and drone attacks on its territory. Analysts believe this strategic timing is designed to provoke Iran into a retaliatory attack against Israel, thus providing the USA with a pretext for a robust military response. The primary objectives of such a response would be to neutralize Iran’s nuclear enrichment capabilities, weaken its armed forces and the elite Revolutionary Guard and cripple its economy to prevent it from financing and supplying weapons to its proxies throughout the Middle East. This theory aligns with Israel’s ongoing military actions in Gaza, despite global protests against the killing of over 70,000 Palestinians, including children, women and vulnerable groups. It also resonates with Israel’s stated goals of permanently dismantling Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen and other Iranian-backed groups, aiming to reduce Iran’s influence in the region.
They also know that without reducing the military and economic might of Iran, no matter how seriously they inflict damage to these proxies they will re-emerge even stronger and better. Therefore, in all probability this attack was deliberately executed in Iran to infuriate Iran’s leadership and bait them to launch an attack on Israeli and US interests. Let us build two hypothetical scenarios one in which Iran has attacked Israel and the US and second it seeks justice through diplomatic means.
If Iran decides to retaliate against Israel and the USA following the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the immediate consequences would likely involve extensive military strikes by Israel and the USA targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, military bases, and infrastructure. This would lead to significant casualties and destruction within Iran, further crippling its economy and military capabilities. The conflict would escalate rapidly, potentially drawing in regional allies and causing widespread instability. The global economy would also be impacted, with oil prices soaring due to instability in the Persian Gulf.
Conversely, if Iran opts for a diplomatic resolution through the United Nations, it would seek international condemnation of the attack and justice for the violation of its sovereignty. This approach would garner support from several countries, leading to a formal UN inquiry and increased international attention. Diplomatic efforts might result in the easing of some sanctions on Iran, stabilizing its economy and enhancing domestic stability. By choosing diplomacy over conflict, Iran would maintain its regional influence through non-military means and improve its international standing. This path would prevent further destruction and loss of life, fostering gradual improvements in regional stability and potential economic recovery for Iran.
In this precarious situation where Pakistan could be directly affected, it is imperative for the country to resort to active and proactive diplomacy, leveraging its brotherly relations with Iran and its Non-NATO ally status with the USA. Pakistan should play a proactive yet balanced role in mediating tensions between Iran, Israel, and the USA by leveraging diplomatic channels and international platforms. With the support of like-minded countries, both Muslim and non-Muslim, and utilizing forums like the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and other regional and international bodies, Pakistan can work to calm heightened emotions and help sanity prevail. This approach, if successful, will save the region from imminent turmoil and instability, elevate Pakistan’s status as a peace-pursuing nation, and safeguard its national interests.
—The writer is a former Press Secretary to the President.
