Thoughts on the Iran War

Because we need to hear from a non-Iranian, Canadian.

“The victory of communism is inevitable”, says this 1969 propaganda poster by Konuhov

The current situation with the US-Israeli attack on Iran, the Iranian retaliation, and the ways that it is being characterized reminds me of a cold war-era Soviet joke of an American and a Soviet talking:

American: “I’ve got to hand it to your government - the Soviet Union has produced some very good propaganda.”
Soviet: “Thank you but we will never be able to compete with how effective American propaganda has been.”
American: “What do you mean? We don’t have propaganda..”
Soviet: “Exactly.”

As a Canadian, I have to live with the uncomfortable truth that we are not sovereign from American hegemony. The moral and political philosophies we perceive the world through and how we characterize the rest of the world is, essentially, American. However, the little separation I have from American hegemony as a Canadian and the consumption I have of media that is critical of the US and Israel points to one conclusion: America and Israel are today’s greatest perpetrators of terror, sponsors of terror, and agents of destabilization.

The American hegemony has blue pilled us into the stance that we’ve reached an “end of history” status for morality. That, while we may be self-critical at times, only we know what justice is and others don’t. That we may fall short of consistently upholding justice, but we actually care to uphold justice. And that our concepts of justice, human rights, and goodness have been perfected and don’t need to be explored further. By contrast other nations, principally our adversaries and rivals, want to enforce injustice.

I’m not old enough to honestly criticize post-9/11 war on terror or the Iraq war, but one thing that feels consistent with what is happening now in Iran is that form of propaganda: “we are for justice, they are for injustice”. This is very different from CCP-style propaganda of “democracy is chaos” or Nazi-era propaganda of “exterminating the parasites”. Our propaganda tricks us into adopting a worldview that gives us the self-righteousness and license to be critical of others and what they are doing.

I would never defend the Islamic Republic, what they’ve done to their people, or how they’ve represented Islam (especially as a Shi’a Muslim myself). But their anti-American and anti-Zionist stances have been stances of resistance to what they describe as a colonial/imperial power in Israel and an actively/historically destabilizing power in the USA. I don’t doubt that this has manifested into hate-filled, antisemitic propaganda which has led to atrocities that cannot be justified. However, can an honest argument be made that those anti-American and anti-Zionist stances are unfounded? When the US ambassador to Israel supports the expansion of Israel from Egypt to Iraq after Israel has been occupying and annexing territory since its formation, how can acts of resistance (justified or not) to this be the source of instability?

The absurdity of this claim rings even more hollow when it is extended to making the argument that our security in North America is at risk from the Islamic Republic. For a perfect synopsis of that absurdity, watch this clip from the late, great Norm MacDonald:

Not only does Norm point out the absurdity of the West fearing Iran, he also shows how we completely look pass the actual threats, historically, to security and stability. Norm expresses confusion as to why people aren’t more concerned about Germany, when putting into consideration the last 100+ years. For that matter, why aren’t we more threatened by the US and Israel with respect to the world’s security and stability? In the last year, it isn’t Iran that is committing a genocide in occupied territory and executing non-retaliatory strikes on 7 different countries. It’s Israel. And in the last year, it was the US that carried out regime-changing strikes on Venezuela and Iran while threatening to annex Greenland and Canada.

The type of propaganda that normalizes the actions of the US and Israel is the same that dismisses President Trump’s rhetoric as puffery or (even more insidiously) as alien to the American experiment. It is the propaganda that convinces us that we know what’s best and that we know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are because it presumes to know what “good” and “bad” are. It doesn’t feed the insecurity and rage that Nazi propaganda does. And it doesn’t feed the anxiety of chaos and disorder that communist propaganda does. Instead, it does something more insidious. It feeds the vanity and narcissism that we are the protagonist and whoever is in opposition to us is the antagonist. The protagonist is allowed to be imperfect, make mistakes, have a “bad day” (or a bad election). The protagonist is rewarded when they show growth. The antagonist is not extended any of this.

I don’t know what justice is. And I tend to be suspicious of people who are certain of their concepts of justice and injustice. The definition of justice that I gravitate towards is where “power” flows from the more powerful to the less powerful. There’s a lot of holes in this. For example, is Robin Hood an agent of justice or a thief? Or, is the Joker an agent of justice when converting corruption into chaos? In reality, I think the way justice truly manifests is a little more cynical. I would argue that justice is carried out when the powerful are rewarded (shout out to Thrasymachus) - where “might makes right”. When Saddam Hussein was decapitated, justice wasn’t served to the Iraqi people. Justice was served to the military-industrial complex. When a person pays a speeding ticket, justice isn’t served to the security of the public. Justice is served to the people who can afford the speeding ticket.

I think it’s worth reflecting on what justice is and how the powerful parties in the context you live in are describing themselves carrying out justice. Because one thing that is consistent and undeniable, is that it is the powerful that carry out justice. Whatever definition of justice you adhere to, it cannot be served by the less powerful. A worker needs to form a union to accumulate power if they want justice. And it is why acts of resistance are characterized as terrorism. A Palestinian in Gaza may want justice for the rubble where their home was, but what power do they have to serve it? In fact, we in the West claim that justice was served when we raised their home to rubble. We can do that because we have the power to.

This is where I am stuck when it comes to Iran. The regime, in the power it has consolidated over its people, has been the subject of criticism and protest in Iran and around the world. As a Canadian without Iranian heritage, I don’t think it’s my place to say it is good or bad that the regime is being attacked - for that, I defer to the diverse opinions held by Iranians. However, I don’t know if justice is being served to Iranians in this war when it is the US and Israel that are the parties serving it. When hearing reports about the assassinations of top leadership up to, and including, the Ayatollah, I don’t see justice being served to the Iranian people. This is not a commentary on the goodness or badness of the people that have been assassinated. It is an analysis of power and where it is flowing.

With the war in Iran and its destabilization, is power flowing to the Iranian people? Or is it flowing to Israel in that they are destroying their only regional adversary? By the definition I’m comfortable with, this is not justice.

As an aside, war is fucked up and you’re fucked up if you think it is ever okay to start it.

Peace out.