Statement by the DAAM Party

The war between the United States and Israel on the one hand and Iran on the other, which has been underway since February 28, has shaken the Middle East and reverberated throughout the world. As missiles strike across the region and drones explode in the skies above its cities—while Israeli civilians repeatedly run to bomb shelters—a fierce debate has emerged in Israel and internationally regarding the nature of this war: what caused it, and what consequences it may bring.

The statement of the DAAM Party presented here seeks to clarify the sequence of developments that led to this war. It challenges several widely accepted assumptions that have become entrenched within liberal and progressive discourse and points toward the direction that the forces of peace and democratic progress in Israel must adopt in order to defeat the far-right government in the upcoming elections.

DAAM is a joint Jewish-Arab political movement whose members are citizens of Israel committed to Israeli-Palestinian peace based on equality and mutual recognition of rights. Founded in 1995 by Jewish and Palestinian activists, the party promotes social justice, and Jewish-Arab cooperation as the foundation for a democratic future. For peace to rise, mutual recognition is a fundamental principle.

From the early 1980s onward, the founders of DAAM were active participants in the struggle against the occupation, a struggle that reached its historic peak with the outbreak of the First Intifada in December 1987. The party’s position regarding Hamas’s attack on October 7, 2023, and the regional war that followed is grounded in the same principles that have guided its activity from the beginning: opposition to oppression and reactionary forces on all sides, defense of democratic values, and commitment to a political future based on equality between peoples.

The War Against Iran Is a Direct Continuation of October 7

The war that erupted on Saturday, February 28, 2026, began with a coordinated American-Israeli strike against Iran. This confrontation cannot be understood in isolation. It represents the direct continuation of the events set in motion by Hamas’s terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.

For many years Iran systematically cultivated Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as key components of a broader regional network of militias and proxy organizations. Through these forces Tehran expanded its influence across the Middle East while avoiding direct military confrontation with Israel.

This network included Hezbollah in Lebanon; the Assad regime in Syria; Shiite militias in Iraq; the Houthi movement in Yemen; and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Palestinian territories. Together these forces formed what Iran calls the “Axis of Resistance.”

Through this system of proxies—most of them non-state actors—Iran sought to destabilize its rivals while steadily building strategic leverage across the region. The aim of this alliance was never aimed at reaching a long lasting peace in the Middle East.  Ultimately, Tehran aimed to ignite a broader confrontation that would destroy Israel from several fronts and establish the regime of the ayatollahs as the dominant power in the Middle East.

For years the Iranian regime succeeded in pursuing this strategy with relatively little resistance. Its regional standing grew considerably during the past two decades, particularly after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, which had served as a major obstacle to Tehran’s expansionist ambitions.

The failure of the American project in Iraq left a deep trauma in U.S. public opinion. A broad political consensus gradually emerged in Washington that large-scale military confrontation in the Middle East should be avoided whenever possible. This approach was reflected most clearly in the Obama administration’s policy of containment toward Iran, culminating in the nuclear agreement signed in 2015.

Under the diplomatic cover provided by that agreement, the Iranian regime strengthened its proxies in Lebanon and Gaza and encouraged a growing belief among its allies that a decisive confrontation was approaching—a final “day of judgment” aimed at destroying the State of Israel.

When Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad launched their coordinated assault on Israeli communities near Gaza on October 7, they were implementing a broader regional strategy whose objective extended far beyond the Palestinian arena.

The immediate participation of Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthi movement in Yemen in attacks on Israel—what they described as a “war of support”—demonstrated that the assault was not an isolated operation but part of a wider strategic plan. The war that has unfolded since then, reshaping the lives of millions across the Middle East, is therefore the direct consequence of the murderous gamble undertaken by Hamas in the service of Tehran’s strategic ambitions.

The Iranian Regime Refused to Recognize the New Balance of Power

Over the following two years Israel worked to repel the assault launched by Hamas and Hezbollah, targeting the leadership of both organizations and destroying much of their military capacity.  Days after the agreement on a cease fire in Lebanon the Assad Regime in Syria collapsed like a card castle. A central pillar of the “Axis of Resistance” where Iran invested Billions was gone. 

A joint American-Israeli operation in June 2025 severely damaged Iran’s military capabilities and its nuclear program. Two and a half months later, in October 2025, a ceasefire agreement was signed in Gaza and all Israeli hostages were released. The war that had begun on October 7 appeared to have reached its conclusion.

The results of the war in Gaza were clear and decisive, and neither side had a clear interest in renewing the fighting. Yet the Iranian regime refused to acknowledge this reality. Since the June 2025 operation it promoted a narrative claiming that the “Axis of Resistance” had actually won the war and that Israel had been defeated—arguing that Israel itself had requested the ceasefire after suffering heavy damage to economic, medical, and military infrastructure in its major cities.

The leadership in Tehran refused to draw the strategic conclusions required by its defeat and the defeat of its proxies. It ignored the historic significance of the United States joining— for the first time—an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.

At the end of December 2025 the regime’s weakness became dramatically visible when a massive popular uprising erupted in Iran. New social groups joined the protests, including merchants from the traditional bazaar.

Demonstrators chanted “Death to Khamenei” and demanded the overthrow of the regime that had ruled Iran through repression for nearly half a century and driven the country into poverty, hunger, and stagnation.

More than thirty thousand citizens were massacred by the repressive machine within a matter of days in a desperate attempt by the regime to crush the uprising.

Against this backdrop, U.S. President Donald Trump demanded that Iran enter negotiations, backing his demand with the deployment of significant military forces to the region. In February 2026 negotiations between representatives of the United States and Iran opened in the Sultanate of Oman, with the goal of reaching an agreement that might prevent a military confrontation. There was hope that such an agreement could also stabilize the situations in Gaza and Lebanon.

Many observers expected the Iranian regime to recognize the new balance of power and to abandon its megalomanic  strategic ambitions, including its nuclear project. Trump repeatedly stated that he preferred a negotiated settlement to military confrontation. Yet the leaders in Tehran chose to ignore what had become evident. The destructive arrogance that had characterized Hamas’s leadership and led Yahya Sinwar to launch the disastrous October 7 attack, also shaped the position of the Iranian regime. Its negotiators rejected American demands. The message quickly spread to Iran’s allies. Both Hamas and Hezbollah adopted similarly uncompromising positions.

Hezbollah declared that it would not surrender its weapons to the sovereign Lebanese government and would not allow the ceasefire with Israel to be implemented. Hamas rejected the United Nations Security Council resolution calling for its disarmament and continued to obstruct progress toward implementing the reconstruction plan for Gaza.

American Isolationism Allowed Iran to Grow Stronger

All available indications suggest that the Iranian leadership believed it could prevent an attack and secure a favorable agreement without making major concessions. Tehran’s calculation relied on widespread public opposition to war within the United States, including strong opposition from the Democratic Party as well as from segments of the isolationist wing of Trump’s MAGA supporters within the Republican Party.

Iran also assumed that the Gulf states—concerned that war could threaten their oil infrastructure—would exert pressure on Washington to avoid military confrontation. Tehran’s strategic gamble was that the United States would continue its traditional policy of containment, which had dominated American policy for more than a decade.

Indeed, for years Iran succeeded in maneuvering Western governments by exploiting Washington’s reluctance to enter into direct confrontation.

The nuclear agreement signed in 2015 lifted many of the sanctions imposed on Iran and opened economic opportunities that had previously been unavailable. But, under the international legitimacy granted by that agreement, the Iranian regime expanded its ballistic missile program, developed deadly drone technologies (aimed against Ukraine as well), and provided massive financial and military support to militant groups in Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Gaza, and the Palestinian territories.

Even the October 7 attack did not prompt the Biden administration to abandon this flawed policy of containment. In April 2024, after Iran launched hundreds of drones and ballistic missiles at Israel for the first time, the Biden administration sought to restrain Israel’s response, arguing that a regional war had to be avoided at all costs.

In reality, however, the regional war that Washington sought to prevent had already begun.

The aggression of Iran and its proxies against Israel—combined with the brutal massacre of tens of thousands of Iranian citizens during the recent uprising—cannot simply be ignored. Such passivity risks sending a dangerous signal to the world that the use of force is sufficient to deter the United States.

In February 2022 Russia invaded Ukraine and is threatening Europe. China is preparing for a possible invasion of Taiwan. Both are watching developments in the Middle East closely, waiting to see how the United States responds to Iranian aggression. Saudi Arabia’s behavior provides a clear example. In 2019 Iran attacked Saudi oil facilities in Ras Tanura during Trump’s first presidential term. The United States chose not to respond and offered little meaningful assistance to its ally.

Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states concluded that Washington might not defend them and began signing agreements with Iran and strengthening ties with China and Russia.

Even during the negotiations between Washington and Tehran in February 2026, the impression remained that the American administration was eager to reach an agreement and avoid military confrontation.

Yet Iran apparently believed that any concession regarding the foundations of the “Axis of Resistance” would undermine the regime itself. Consequently, Iranian negotiators arrived at the negotiating table in Muscat and Geneva with a rigid and defiant position.

Under those circumstances, Trump ultimately chose the military option.

The Objectives of the United States and Israel

As the war continues, an important question remains:
Will Israel and the United States succeed in bringing down the Iranian regime? Will the Iranian people take to the streets again?

Will Iran eventually become a democratic state capable of peaceful relations with its neighbors? At this stage of the war, any definitive answer would be premature.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its affiliated networks function as a powerful military-economic structure dedicated to advancing Iran’s expansionist ambitions while enforcing domestic repression.

This organization possesses enormous economic interests inside and outside Iran and has little intention of relinquishing them. In many ways it operates as a violent, mafia-like structure—a state within a state.

These forces are currently driving the continuation of the war and refusing to acknowledge the emerging balance of power.

Although Israel and the United States have stated that they would welcome the fall of the regime, regime change was not among the official war aims. The declared objectives were more limited:
the destruction of Iran’s nuclear program, severe damage to its ballistic missile and drone capabilities, and the neutralization of its regional proxies.

A fourth objective involves weakening the regime’s internal repression mechanisms—particularly the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij militia.

If these goals are achieved, it may create conditions under which the Iranian people could again rise against the regime.

The American Public Struggles to Confront Global Changes

The attack launched on Saturday morning, February 28, came as a complete surprise to the American public. War with Iran had not been part of the national debate. In Israel, by contrast, the public had been preparing for such a possibility for months, as the government repeatedly warned about the growing likelihood of war.

When Trump delivered his State of the Union address to Congress on February 24—only four days before the attack—he devoted only a few minutes of a two-hour speech to Iran. It is therefore unsurprising that American public opinion was shocked and unprepared when the war began. Domestic concerns dominate American political life: economic challenges, rising costs of living, immigration issues, and political scandals.

Polls conducted after the attack revealed widespread skepticism about the war and deep concern about another prolonged American involvement in the Middle East. Many Americans do not view Iran’s efforts to destabilize the region as a direct threat to U.S. national security.

Yet from a geopolitical perspective it is difficult to deny that the United States—as the leading power of the democratic world—cannot remain indifferent to Iran’s attempt to impose a fundamentalist regional order and eliminate Israel, one of Washington’s closest allies.

The failure of the American administration to explain clearly to its own public the reasons and objectives of the war represents a serious leadership failure.

Israeli Public Opinion Supports the War but Will Not Forget October 7

Some small forces on the Israeli left—including the Communist Party, Hadash, Ahmad Tibi, and Balad—oppose the war and appear disconnected from the prevailing mood of Israeli society. Like segments of the left in Europe and the United States, they call for an immediate ceasefire and effectively align themselves with Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.

By contrast, the major opposition parties in Israel support the government’s military actions, recognizing that Iran represents an existential threat not only to Israel but to the entire region.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has attempted to transform the war into a political asset and to gain electoral points. He is presenting his close relationship with Trump as proof that he is the only Israeli leader capable of persuading the United States to cooperate militarily with Israel at such an unprecedented level.

The evidence of polls conducted after the attack on Iran was launched suggest that Bibi’s cards have not changed. Israeli political camps remain largely unchanged: Netanyahu’s supporters continue to support him, while his opponents remain firmly opposed. This is largely because a majority of Israelis strongly oppose Netanyahu’s domestic policies and his ongoing attacks on democratic institutions, particularly the judiciary and the free press.

Trump’s public attack on President Isaac Herzog and his call for Netanyahu to receive a pardon provoked widespread anger among Israelis, many of whom saw it as an attempt by Netanyahu to use the war and his relationship with Trump to escape his corruption trial.

Even if the war with Iran ends in a clear military victory, Israel’s political landscape is unlikely to change dramatically. Many Israelis fear that Netanyahu will attempt to use electoral success to further weaken democratic institutions while advancing the agenda of the far-right, the settler movement, and ultra-Orthodox parties.

The Political Task Ahead

The task facing supporters of peace and democracy in Israel after the war—regardless of its outcome—is to unite all opposition forces in order to replace the dangerous right-wing government led by Netanyahu.

The broad civic movement that filled Israel’s streets for nearly a year prior to  October 7 in defense of democracy continues today to oppose Netanyahu and his extremist partners. At the same time, the opposition camp still struggles to present a coherent political alternative.

It remains divided and lacks unified leadership as well as a clear policy toward both the Arab world and the unresolved Palestinian question.

Despite these difficulties, the democratic camp must unite and bring about the defeat of Netanyahu’s government.

Partnership with MK Mansour Abbas and the broad political forces he represents in the Arab community in Israel, is essential to securing a democratic majority and preventing Netanyahu from returning to power for another destructive term.

DAAM Party calls upon all its members and supporters to mobilize politically to end Netanyahu’s rule and bring about a political transformation in Israel.

Even if the government that replaces him does not fully adopt the peace program envisioned by DAAM, it would nevertheless represent a crucial change—one that safeguards Israeli democracy and creates the conditions for deeper processes that could eventually open the way to a just Israeli-Palestinian peace.

The post Iran’s Regime Is Now Paying the Price for Its Strategic Mistake in Backing Hamas’s October 7 Attack first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

“Mr. President, give the order.”
That is the headline of an opinion piece by commentator and journalist Shimon Shiffer, published in Yedioth Ahronoth on June 18, 2025. Shiffer—who until recently directed much of his criticism at Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government—now expresses a prevailing Israeli consensus, forged in the pain and aftermath of Iran’s backed attack on October 7. Every Israeli now understands: Iran, through its regional proxies—chief among them Hamas—has resolved to bring about the destruction of the State of Israel.

“Mr. President Trump, this is your moment to make history, to stand alongside Roosevelt. Order a strike on the Fordow nuclear facility and help us do the dirty work for the rest of the world. Now is the time to lead a coalition that will dismantle Iran’s nuclear project and force the ayatollahs into an agreement that prevents its reconstitution.”

The Trump administration’s reluctance to join the campaign to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions reflects a broader mood in America. Since 2008, the United States has lost its status as leader of the free world. Trump’s isolationism—backed by the fascist-leaning MAGA movement within the Republican Party—is a radical expression of an American consensus now shared by Democrats and Republicans alike. It’s a consensus born of the bitter failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, rejecting any further military interventions abroad involving “boots on the ground.”

Ironically, while key figures in the American administration now oppose Israel’s plans to strike Iran, it was the U.S. itself that empowered Iran and fostered a near-mystical belief in the military might and stability of the Ayatollah regime.

The original sin traces back to the Republican administration of George W. Bush. It was then that the lie took shape: Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. This fabrication served as the pretext for invading Iraq under the banner of regime change. Worth remembering is the role of none other than Benjamin Netanyahu—then a private citizen temporarily out of politics—who testified under oath before a congressional oversight committee. With his trademark certainty, he declared: “The question isn’t whether to topple the Iraqi regime, but when.”

Judging by the consequences, Netanyahu’s contribution to the catastrophe that engulfed the Middle East—and enabled Iran’s ascendancy—demonstrates that despite his boastful claims to prophetic vision, he in fact dug Israel into a deep hole, from which it now bleeds to escape. As the proverb says: “A fool throws a stone into a well, and a thousand wise men cannot retrieve it.”

American administrations’ aversion to military involvement was also evident in the 2013 U.S.-Russia deal to remove Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal. This deal came after the Assad regime used chemical weapons against its own people to suppress a popular uprising that threatened to unseat it. President Obama initially set a “red line,” warning that crossing it would trigger U.S. military intervention. But under pressure from his Democratic Party, he settled for a weak agreement with Putin. While it removed some of Syria’s chemical stockpile, it opened the door for direct Iranian and Hezbollah intervention, which saved the Assad regime and led to their complete takeover of Syria.

Assad, of course, ignored the American warning once he realized that Washington had no intention of deploying troops on Syrian soil. Moreover, Obama consistently refused to support the democratic opposition forces in Syria. And Netanyahu? He supported the Obama-Putin deal and ignored the existential threat posed by Iran’s total takeover of Syria and Lebanon.

Over time, Syria and Lebanon became strategic Iranian outposts. Israel, caught unprepared, was stunned by the “seven-front” assault of October 7. Once again, Netanyahu—self-proclaimed oracle of future threats—was caught with his pants down, lost control, and nearly lost the country.

Many U.S. Democrats and prominent Israeli commentators blame Netanyahu for pushing to cancel the Iran nuclear deal, attributing Iran’s sprint toward a nuclear bomb to Trump’s withdrawal from the agreement. It’s a difficult point to refute. Still, all those critics—including Netanyahu himself—entirely ignore the deal’s dark side. It gave Iran free rein to develop its ballistic missile program and enabled it to entrench itself throughout the Shiite Crescent via proxies in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories through Hamas. Simultaneously, it allowed Iran to lay out its practical blueprint for Israel’s annihilation from multiple fronts.

It was precisely this danger that Netanyahu failed to warn the world about. Instead, he reveled in playing a game of “deterrence” against Iran’s proxies. He transformed the so-called “Campaign Between the Wars” (MABAM)—Israel’s ongoing military effort to curb Iranian entrenchment in Syria—into a kind of strategic genius endorsed by Military Intelligence. The IDF was so focused on MABAM that it missed Iran’s strategic surprise being orchestrated right under its nose by Hamas—a relatively weaker and poorly armed proxy, which in fact depended on Israeli financial and economic assistance to survive.

As the trauma of the October 7 massacre lingers, Netanyahu decided to target the “head of the octopus” and launched “the mother of all wars.” While some critics see this as “another attempt by Bibi to evade his trial,” the broader Israeli public—including most opposition parties—perceives this campaign as a just and existential battle: a fight for survival.

Yet, at this critical juncture, our “strategic ally” limits itself to tactical calculations. Like the Biden administration, the Trump administration hides behind the pretext of “regional war risk” to justify its appeasement of a weakened Iranian regime—deprived of its primary pillar, Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran made its intentions clear with two deadly missile attacks on Israel in April and October 2024. In both cases, Biden demanded Israeli restraint—first urging no response, then permitting only a symbolic one. Again, under the excuse of “regional escalation.”

But after October 7, time began to run out. The Trump administration has done everything to placate Iran while signaling clear disapproval of Netanyahu. Trump’s highly publicized visits to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf—deliberately skipping Israel—the separate deal he struck with the Houthis, his admiration for dictator Erdogan, direct negotiations with Hamas behind Israel’s back, and his initiation of talks with Iran all left little room for doubt: Trump is willing to throw Israel under the wheels of the Saudi bus in exchange for a handful of petrodollars and MAGA applause.

Israel’s strike on Friday morning, June 13—the elimination of Iran’s entire military leadership and nuclear scientists—not only exposed the regime’s vulnerability, thanks to Mossad’s deep intelligence penetration, but also forced the U.S. into a dramatic dilemma. Israel chose to go at it alone, placing its own civilian population on the front lines. The sirens night and day, the casualties, the ruined homes, and the response of Israeli society all bear witness: the people of Israel see this as a war of survival.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz spoke the truth: “Israel is doing the dirty work for all of us.”

As of this writing, it remains unclear whether Trump will join the campaign to finish the job. The path has already been paved. U.S. participation is not a favor to Israel—it is a moral obligation. After all, it was the U.S. that created Middle Eastern chaos with its misguided war to topple Saddam Hussein. The war against Iran could mark the beginning of a new era in the region—not for the sake of the corrupt Gulf princes, but for the sake of 100 million Iranians and 300 million Arabs who languish under authoritarian regimes that perpetuate backwardness, poverty, and repression of civil rights.

They were betrayed by the indifference of America and Europe in the face of the Arab Spring—the greatest democratic revolution the Arab world has ever seen. This too will be remembered as a historic strategic and moral failure.

As for Netanyahu, he will go down in history as a leader who failed to anticipate the future, made every possible mistake, and above all, committed the fatal error of ignoring the Palestinian question—thereby opening the front door for Iran’s entrance into the Arab world.

The post Iran – The Original Sin first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria is good news for the Arab nations and for all freedom seekers around the globe. Since the 2011 outbreak of the Arab Spring in Syria, Da’am Party has unequivocally supported the popular struggle to overthrow Assad’s brutal regime. During that time, the party organized protests in front of the Russian embassy in Tel Aviv and during the visit of the Russian Prime Minister to Israel, demanding an end to the Syrian genocide.

In 2014, Da’am Party initiated the “Committee for Solidarity with the Syrian People,” which included over 50 Jewish and Arab figures. The committee held speaking panels and raised funds for Syrian refugee children, which were transferred to them through Save the Children.

The timing of Assad’s regime fall is no coincidence. After more than 13 years of oppression, which led to the displacement of 13 million Syrian citizens, the killing of half a million people, and the imprisonment and torture of hundreds of thousands, regime opponents managed to overthrow it almost without a fight. The final disintegration of the Syrian regime can be attributed to Hamas’s terrorist attack on October 7, 2023, which was orchestrated and supported by Iran—the patron of both Hamas and Assad’s regime.

The Da’am Party strongly condemned the barbaric attack of Hamas, which aligned itself with the Iranian axis and sought to extinguish the state of Israel, and expressed support for Israel’s right to defend itself. Our stance against Iran and its proxies reflects our commitment to the freedom of Arab nations, above all the Palestinian people, who have long suffered from displacement and suffering. We argue that the struggle for progress, democracy, and human rights in the region requires Israel to end its political intransigence, but such progress will not be possible without the defeat of the Iranian axis, which seeks to establish an aggressive and extremist theocratic rule in the region that views Israel as its target for destruction.

Over recent decades, under the pretext of “liberating Jerusalem,” Iranian aggression has gained momentum. Iran has nurtured and armed its proxies —Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas—who have wreaked havoc and destroyed the lives of millions in Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. Iran also created a “ring of fire” around Israel and positioned itself as a regional power. Its objectives, however were entirely detached from the needs of the peoples who became hostages of the Iranian regime.

The collapse of Assad’s regime began with the confrontation between Iran and Israel on October 7, 2023. The decisive event in this process, which paved the way for the Syrian revolutionaries, was undoubtedly the assassination of Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah a year later, on September 27, 2024. Israel’s decision to eliminate Nasrallah, who played a prominent role in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, sent a clear signal to the Lebanese and Syrians that the organizations tied to the Iranian axis, including Iran itself, are not invincible.

The joy expressed in videos from liberated areas of Syria following Israel’s killing of Nasrallah was striking. The Syrian people knew Hezbollah fighters and their revered leader Nasrallah as perpetrators of some of the most heinous crimes against the residents of Syrian towns and cities such as Qusayr, Madaya, Zabadani, and many others. Hezbollah’s acts of oppression included murder, rape, systematic starvation, and torture. The celebrations in Syria over Nasrallah’s death reflected the Syrian people’s view of Hezbollah and Iran as their enemies and their approval of Israel’s fight against them.

In Lebanon, a broad front emerged in opposition to the “Support for Gaza War” launched unilaterally by Hezbollah on October 8, 2023, without any deliberation in parliament. The Lebanese people clearly understood that this war would bring devastation to Lebanon, hollow out the country’s institutions, and turn Lebanon into an Iranian proxy state serving as a base for endless future wars against Israel.

The success of the rebels in toppling the regime in Damascus can be attributed to several factors, including the weakening of Hezbollah and its defeat in the war against Israel; the failure of Hamas; the blows suffered by Iran; and Russia’s entanglement in its aggressive war against Ukraine. The U.S. and Western Europe maintained relations with Russia even after 2015. The tacit acceptance of Russia’s murderous airstrikes on Aleppo (the second city of importance in Syria) in 2015, aimed at saving Assad’s regime, was later interpreted by Putin as a green light to invade Ukraine, with little expectation of serious Western opposition.

However, a decade of Russian-Iranian occupation in Syria failed to stabilize Assad’s regime. The destruction of the economy, reliance on a Narco-economy, and rampant government corruption left extreme oppression as the regime’s sole guarantee for survival. Syria, like Lebanon, became a failed state, unable to protect its citizens or provide for their most fundamental needs.

Life for Syrians, including those from groups that once supported the regime, turned into a nightmare. In 2011, when the Syrian uprising began as part of the democratic Arab Spring, the regime portrayed itself as the sole bulwark against jihadist forces threatening secular life, garnering support from minorities and residents of major cities. This time, however, during the ten days leading up to the regime’s collapse, it became evident that this support base had completely eroded. As the rebel forces advanced toward Aleppo, Hama, Homs, and Damascus, they were greeted with cheers and celebrations by the local residents. Fifty-four years of the Assad dynasty rule in Syria had united the Syrian people against it.

The fall of the Syrian regime is a historic event that shakes the foundations of all authoritarian Arab regimes in the Middle East. These regimes had welcomed Assad back into their fold over the past year, normalizing relations with him. The United Arab Emirates, with the support of the U.S. administration, played a leading role in this normalization effort. For all of them, Bashar al-Assad’s downfall signifies that the Arab Spring has not yet had its final say.

For the Da’am Party, the revolutionary wave of the Arab Spring in 2011–2012 reflected a profound historical shift, embodying the Arab peoples’ aspirations for democracy. We rejected the views that claimed it was a mere fleeting event serving the interests of extremist Islamist forces. We interpreted the uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria, and later in Lebanon and Iraq, as a new era in which the peoples of the region seek their place in the modern 21st-century world. After years of tyranny, they want to share in the achievements of progress and the social, economic, political, and cultural openness that other world nations enjoy. The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime marks a critical milestone in the collapse of the entire Iranian axis. It will have a particularly significant impact on Hezbollah, which will no longer be able to operate as an armed militia alongside the Lebanese state.

The regime’s fall also delivers a severe blow to Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and to Iran’s broader project, which has leveraged hostility toward Israel and calls for its destruction as an effective tool for gaining popular support. This defeat will have direct consequences on the Iranian political arena. The damage to the prestige and status of the Revolutionary Guards, Iran’s militant force, will inevitably strengthen the civil reformist movement.

If the Iranian regime wishes to survive following Syria’s collapse, it must abandon the idea of exporting the Shiite revolution and dominating Arab states under the pretext of “liberating Jerusalem.” Instead, it must redirect its efforts toward rebuilding the Iranian state, society, and economy.

As for Russia, that was “invited” to Syria by Assad, it has lost all its assets in Syria, from the Khmeimim airbase to the Tartus naval base. This situation will have far-reaching consequences for Russia’s prestige as a military power and for its actions in Ukraine.

Although Israel’s actions over the past 14 months did not reflect a coherent plan, they played a decisive role in the fall of Assad’s regime. Israel was caught off guard when Hamas launched “Operation Al-Aqsa Flood” on October 7, 2023. Despite the bitter failure it experienced that day, Israel demonstrated its resilience to itself and to the world. This stands in stark contrast to Nasrallah’s claims that Israel’s power is illusory and comparable to a “spider web.” Backed by overwhelming support from its citizens, its economic, social, military, and technological capabilities, in addition to generous U.S. military and economic support, Israel managed to reverse the equation. Fighting on multiple fronts, Israel proved that the Iranian axis is the weaker force.

As the Syrian people embark on the long and arduous journey of internal reconstruction, it is vital for Israel to cease all interference in their affairs, allowing them to rebuild their political, social, and economic lives according to their own will.

This war, however, came at an unbearable cost, especially for the Palestinian people, who paid a devastating price: tens of thousands killed and injured, many of them women and children, widespread hunger, and the internal multi-time displacement of over two million Gaza residents. Also, the West Bank faced a severe crisis, exemplified by the closure of checkpoints, leaving 200,000 workers without a livelihood. The Lebanese people suffered immensely, with countless homes destroyed, civilians displaced, and many lives lost. It is important to remember that this tectonic upheaval was triggered by Hamas’ reckless and murderous actions, including mass killings, rapes, and the abduction of civilians—among them elderly people, women, and children—who remain hostages to this day. None of them ever saw a representative of the red cross.

All of this could have been avoided if Israel had acted differently. The Iranian axis could have been dismantled earlier had Israel chosen to support the democratic forces in Syria against the regime. When the Syrian people rose up in 2011, Israel chose to watch from the side-lines, preferring to maintain the status quo with the “familiar enemy,” Bashar al-Assad. Israel allowed the massive intervention of Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah in support of Assad. The result was the bolstering of Iranian power in Syria and the arming of Hezbollah, which grew into a formidable force and joined Hamas in the attacks of October 8, 2023.

However, the original sin of Israel, which led to the devastating war of October 2023, lies in its decades-long refusal to reach a just political solution to the Palestinian issue. Israel systematically undermined the establishment of an independent Palestinian state and sought to deepen internal Palestinian divisions by providing economic support to Hamas. Due to the blindness of its political and military establishment, Israel adopted an approach that viewed Hamas as a strong but deterred force—a sort of guarantee for maintaining the status quo, particularly in the absence of any significant global pressure for a political resolution. For years, Israel turned a blind eye as Hamas built its military strength, using the generous aid it received to boost its missile industry and construct a network of tunnels designed for future attacks.

The fall of the Syrian regime directly serves Israel’s security interests, as it cuts off Iran’s military supply routes to Hezbollah through Syria. Iran’s “ring of fire” around Israel has collapsed. At the same time, Israel watches the dramatic developments in Syria with suspicion and concern. The Israeli political and security leadership—spanning both the coalition and opposition—views these events through a purely military lens. Their actions focus on damage control, anticipating the potential emergence of rogue elements seeking to act against Israel during Syria’s transition period.

From the Syrian people’s perspective, Iran and Russia are their primary enemies—not Israel. The Syrian rebels understand their victory is partly owed to Israel’s military superiority in its campaign against Iran. Today, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq are fragile, fragmented states. Rebuilding these nations after the systematic destruction caused by Iranian occupation will take a long time.

As the Syrian people embark on the long and arduous journey of internal reconstruction, it is vital for Israel to cease all interference in their affairs, allowing them to rebuild their political, social, and economic lives according to their own will. The same principle applies to Lebanon’s rehabilitation. Neither Syria nor Lebanon currently poses a threat to Israel. All they seek is to heal the deep wounds inflicted by the Iranian regime and its allies—Assad’s regime and Hezbollah.

Within Israel, there is much to hold Prime Minister Netanyahu accountable for. The Lebanese journalist Fares Khashan was correct when he tweeted on Sunday, December 8, that “Bashar al-Assad is a far greater criminal than Netanyahu. Assad committed crimes against his own people, while Netanyahu acted against an external enemy that threatened to annihilate Israel.”

While Assad’s regime was worse, this does not absolve Netanyahu of being the most incompetent prime minister in Israel’s history. He supported and bolstered Hamas, systematically obstructing any political resolution with the Palestinians. His refusal to pursue a political solution gave Iran an opening to present itself as “the protector” of the Palestinian people. Netanyahu deepened the occupation and perpetuated an apartheid regime that denies 5 million Palestinians basic human and civil rights.

He failed to protect Israeli citizens from the horrific massacres perpetrated by Hamas on October 7, leaving defenceless Israelis vulnerable to unimaginable violence. Netanyahu also ushered openly racist parties into his government, focusing his efforts on undermining Israel’s democratic system and attempting a judicial coup to shield himself from the criminal charges he faces. Now that fighting has diminished, and a new phase in his trial begun, he is giving a new green light for the judicial coup to advance.  In recent years, Netanyahu has adopted a mantra akin to Assad’s: “It’s me or the state burns down.”

In the aftermath of the devastating war, all peoples of the region—particularly the Palestinian people—must reassess their approach to the conflict. Support for armed struggle, the “resistance axis,” and violence has led the region and the Palestinian people to ruin and disaster. A new path must be forged, one that prioritizes diplomacy, coexistence, and rebuilding trust.

Without a doubt, respecting individual freedoms and adopting democracy as a fundamental framework for societal development is a guarantee for the security of all nations. The Palestinians must change their misguided approach of boycotting everything Israeli, including the democratic forces within Israel, under the pretext of opposing “normalization.” Instead of this futile policy that leads to a dead end, a creative leadership is needed to present a plan for building Palestinian society in partnership with progressive elements in Israel.

This equation also requires an Israeli component. Liberal and democratic forces in Israel must reassess their positions and put an end to the notion that the conflict with the Palestinians can be “managed” and its resolution postponed to a distant future. Leaving the occupation and apartheid regime in the territories intact—even while taking steps to “reduce the conflict”—creates fertile ground for the growth of racist and fascist forces and fuels the flames of judicial overhaul and the dismantling of democracy. The result is the establishment of an anti-liberal, religious, messianic regime, with the Nation-State Law of 2018 serving as its wake-up call, leading to the judicial coup of Minister of Justice Yariv Levin in 2023.

The pro-democracy protest movement, which demonstrated for months against the far-right government, proved that there are resilient and influential democratic forces in Israel with widespread public support who are aware of the dangers. This movement must break free from conservative thinking and adopt radical solutions based on partnerships of peace and democracy with the peoples of the region. Peace and mutual recognition with the Palestinians are central components that will secure the future of all nations, as well as the stability and rebuilding of Israeli society itself.

The post Position Statement of the Da’am Party
Fall of the Assad Regime: The End of the Iranian-Russian Axis first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

At the recent opening of the Knesset’s winter session, Benjamin Netanyahu outlined his political beliefs, delivering a programmatic speech aimed at his critics in the Knesset and the media who claim he has neither a strategy nor a plan for the post-war period. A year into the war, just days after Israel struck substantial military facilities in Iran, a month after Hassan Nasrallah was bombed from the air, and ten days after the killing of Yahya Sinwar, Netanyahu was in a position to begin summarizing the war’s achievements and sketching out his political vision. He explained to those present the meaning of what he calls “absolute victory.”

According to Netanyahu, “absolute victory is a structured and consistent work plan” that involves the elimination of both Hamas and Hezbollah leadership, along with a serious blow to the Iranian regime. He describes this as part of a “strategic turning point,” highlighted by “extensive attacks on Iran—and on the proxies that were supposed to defend the Islamic Republic.” However, this strategic shift must ultimately lead to a political achievement that secures Israel’s peace and security for future generations, ensuring that the victory over the Iranian axis is indeed an absolute one.

He explained his vision for “the day after”: “Members of the Knesset, in the ‘day after,’ Hamas will no longer control Gaza, and Hezbollah will no longer be positioned on our northern border. We are currently working on plans to stabilize these two fronts. But the ‘day after’ also includes another crucial aspect: I aim to continue the process I led a few years ago with the signing of the historic Abraham Accords—to achieve peace with additional Arab countries. In the Abraham Accords, we secured four peace agreements—let me emphasize: peace for peace, peace born out of strength—with important countries in the Middle East. These countries, along with others, clearly see the blows we are delivering to those who attack us—the Iranian axis of evil. They are impressed by our determination and audacity. They aspire, like us, for a stable, secure, and prosperous Middle East.”

Ironically, the Abraham Accords acted as a catalyst for the October 7th attack. On one hand, they created the illusion that peace with Arab countries could be achieved based on “peace for peace.” On the other, they set the stage for Iran to adopt the Palestinian cause, after Arab states abandoned it in favor of a strategic alliance with Israel.

Netanyahu’s vision for a post-war peace serves as further evidence that the horrific tragedy of October 7 did not alter the flawed conception that was adopted by Netanyahu as well as by the political and security establishments and almost the entire society. The fundamental misconception leading to this erroneous conclusion is the complete erasure of the Palestinian question from public consciousness. The failure that manifested on October 7 was not merely an incorrect assessment of Hamas’s intentions or a belief that it could be deterred. This misconception emerged from the assumption that the Israeli Palestinian conflict is unsolvable, leading to the conclusion that it must simply be “managed.”

The decision to manage the conflict instead of resolving it has led to a policy of “feeding the monster (Hamas).” The Palestinian question is fundamentally not a security issue but a political one; thus, basing “absolute victory” on the elimination of Hamas leadership is nothing more than an illusion. While Hamas’s leadership has indeed been eliminated, it left behind tens of thousands of dead, 2 million people who are homeless and lack livelihoods, education, and healthcare.

Five million Palestinians, of them two million in Gaza and three million in the West Bank, represent a problem that is entirely Israel’s. This has been the case, and it will continue to be so. Palestinian citizens are completely at the mercy of the State of Israel, the sovereign power in the area. “Absolute victory” has effectively returned Gaza to Israel’s exclusive control, and there is no Arab or other state that can, wants, or is capable of replacing Israel in the unprecedented reconstruction needed after this disastrous war.

Ironically, the Abraham Accords acted as a catalyst for the October 7th attack. On one hand, they created the illusion that peace with Arab countries would be achieved based on “peace for peace.” On the other hand, they set the stage for Iran to adopt the Palestinian cause, after Arab states abandoned it in favor of a strategic alliance with Israel.

In his Knesset policy speech, Netanyahu repeated the same mistaken concept that transforms his vision into an illusion. True, this war creates a “strategic turning point.” Hamas brigades have nearly been destroyed, Hezbollah is losing its standing in Lebanon, and Israel has demonstrated its military superiority over Iran. These Israeli victories, however, will not erase the bitter and humiliating failure of October 7.

Indeed, Netanyahu refuses to take responsibility for the failure, opposes an independent commission of inquiry, and is fighting for his political survival. In contrast, Arab states—potential partners for future peace agreements—clearly understand that the key to closing the gap through which Iran has infiltrated, gaining public support across the Arab world and unsettling regimes in Jordan, Morocco, and on the international stage, is to address the Palestinian issue.

It is no coincidence that Saudi Arabia initiated the establishment of the “International Alliance for Implementing the Two-State Solution.” The Palestinian issue is fundamentally an Arab matter, not an Iranian one; it concerns the Sunni world, not the Shiite. The support Iran gained by adopting the Palestinian cause left the Arab world vulnerable to criticism of the Arab masses, who took to the streets in demonstrations supporting Hamas and opposing Israel.

How did we reach a point where Israel’s Prime Minister delivers a speech in the Knesset about peace without mentioning the Palestinians even once? And on the other hand, how is it possible that the opposition limits its’ criticism of the October 7 failure and the tragic fate of the remaining 101 hostages, without shaking the people from their illusion? Israel’s strategic problem is not Iran, located 1,800 kilometers away, but the Palestinians, who live just a few kilometers from us.

Israel will not gain legitimacy through its military and technological superiority but through a change in its approach to the Palestinian people. The entire world, including the Arab world, can no longer turn a blind eye to the occupation and the apartheid-like regime imposed on the West Bank and Gaza. Israel’s struggle for existence cannot come at the expense of the Palestinian people’s existence. The fact that Israel’s political and security establishment, from right to left, ignores this fundamental truth lays the groundwork for the next disaster. It is possible to destroy all of Gaza, to eliminate Hamas leaders, but it is impossible to extinguish the natural desire of five million Palestinians for a life of dignity, equality, and freedom.

This political blindness poses a real danger to the survival of Israeli society. It not only creates conditions for ongoing bloodshed but also serves as fertile ground for the growth of fascist elements aiming to turn Israel into a messianic theocracy. The roots of the judicial coup are deeply entwined with the occupation, as fascist ideology categorizes people based on their ethnic and religious affiliations. In the eyes of the Israeli right, Palestinians are not considered equal human beings, and therefore anyone who supports liberal ideas and values of equality and democracy is also labeled a traitor and an enemy of the people. Netanyahu’s vision of “absolute victory” is primarily a false prophecy detached from reality. In this sense, Netanyahu has not changed; he has been consistent in his path all along.

The most troubling aspect is that today there is no party or leader capable of presenting a political alternative. It seems we have not learned the lesson of October 7; we have not understood that peace begins at home, and that to achieve peace, we must share our rights and economic resources to enable equality between Israelis and Palestinians. Without these fundamental conditions, Israeli society will have no future.

The post Victory? Perhaps. Absolute victory? No. first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The Iranian missile attack on Israel on October 1, ended with one fatality—a worker from Gaza who was in a Palestinian police base near Jericho. According to reports, he was hit by shrapnel from interceptors and missile fragments that fell in the area of the village of Nu’aymah, where workers from Gaza were staying after being stranded following the October 7 Hamas terror attack in Israel’s south. The worker killed, Sameh Khadr Hassan Al-Asali (38), was struck in the head and died on the spot. According to his ID, published on Palestinian social media, he was a resident of the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza and had three sons—Adi, Amro, and Yazan.

The Iranian regime, claiming to lead what it calls the “axis of resistance” against the Israeli occupation, launched 180 ballistic missiles at Israel to express its commitment to the Palestinian liberation struggle and revenge the deaths of Ismail Haniye and Hassan Nassralah. Ironically, the only practical outcome of this grandiose act was yet another Palestinian victim. Not just any victim, but a Gazan worker. Along with several hundred of his peers, he was forced to seek refuge in the West Bank for a whole year after his path back to his family in Gaza was blocked since October 2023.

According to news agency reports, missile and interceptor fragments fell in several locations in Israel as well as in some Palestinian towns in the West Bank. By the end of this tense evening, there were a few light injuries and minor property damage in Israel and the territories.

The Iranian regime, as mentioned, has aspirations of leading the Arab region. To advance this goal, it has established a network of proxies in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq, funded and armed by Tehran. Iran was behind the Hamas terror attack on October 7. It also determined that Hezbollah would conduct a year-long war of attrition on Israel’s northern border, resulting in hundreds of thousands of Israelis and Lebanese becoming refugees in their own countries.

The missile attack (second to the one launched in April) was intended to be the ultimate response to the severe blow Israel dealt to the prestige of the Tehran regime and its strategic standing. Instead of producing an image of victory that would demonstrate its strength to the entire world and reinforce the trust of the region’s residents in it, this attack became an embarrassing failure for a regime incapable of addressing the basic needs of its own 90 million inhabitants.

As usual, the failure was concealed.  Supreme Leader Khamenei mobilized thousands for victory parades in the streets of Tehran; media channels and social networks were filled with images of the “severe hits” supposedly dealt to strategic targets in Israel. The Israeli report that the attack was thwarted with American, British, and Jordanian assistance was dismissed as false propaganda of the “Zionist entity” and the corrupt West. The credibility of the Iranian version of this missile attack is no higher than that of Nasrallah’s previous boasts about striking Unit 8200’s base in Tel Aviv.

The communication channels of the “axis of resistance” do not mention, even in passing, the Gazan worker killed in Jericho. Hamas, which sold its soul for Iranian money and weapons, ignores Palestinian workers employed in Israel and the settlements. It views them as traitors for their willingness to work for Israeli employers.

Against the backdrop of the resounding military blows dealt to Hezbollah in recent weeks and the Iranian failing missile attack, a recognition is beginning to form in the region that Iran is a fragile reed.

More than 200,000 Palestinian workers from the West Bank, whose employment in Israel served as a lifeline for the ailing Palestinian economy before October 2023, have since been barred from entering Israel. These workers, along with many others, are direct victims of the war. Unfortunately, the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah also refuses to support them. Instead of standing up clearly against the false rhetoric of the “Axis of Resistance”, shunning Hamas, and presenting themselves as a worthy alternative, the PA leaders appear as an excess of Hamas. The Palestinian workers are not a factor in the equation – neither for Hamas nor for Abu Mazen’s PA.

Against the backdrop of the resounding military blows dealt to Hezbollah in recent weeks and the Iranian failing missile attack, a recognition is beginning to form in the region that Iran is a fragile reed. The false war waged by the Tehran clerical regime against Israel aims to create a scapegoat to divert public attention from its clerical authoritarian hold and corrupt nature and ensure its stability.

The Iranian people have understood the big lie for a long time. Since the Green Movement in 2009 against the rigged election in favor of Ahmadinejad, we have witnessed brave waves of protests and popular uprisings, culminating in the women’s uprising that began in September 2022 after Mahsa Amini’s murder for not putting her hair dress properly. This public protest faced murderous repression, executions of dissidents, and silencing of activists and artists. In October 2023, we saw the crowd at a football stadium in Tehran booing regime representatives who demanded a moment of silence in solidarity with Palestine. The Iranian people understand that the talk of the “Zionist enemy” and solidarity with Palestine is sheer hypocrisy and simply do not believe it. The results of the presidential elections held in June 2024 also reflect the deep criticism and distrust citizens feel toward the supreme leader’s rule.

It is important to mention that Israel under Netanyahu is not free of responsibility for the region’s descent into a destructive war. The notion that the resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians can be indefinitely postponed, thus leaving five million Palestinians without basic political, human and civil rights (a view also shared by the previous Left/Right Bennett-Lapid government), was the loop hole through which Tehran, Hamas, and Hezbollah managed to penetrate the Palestinian arena and exploit it for their own sectarian purposes.

As dangerous and difficult as the current crisis is, it also represents an opportunity to address the problem at its root. The blow suffered by the Iranian axis could strengthen the struggle for democracy in the region. This struggle threatens not only the religious leaders and Revolutionary Guards in Tehran, not only their front organizations, but also Netanyahu and his racist partners, who viewed Hamas as a strategic asset that exempted them from the need to advance a political settlement.

The democratic forces in Israel and Palestine, seeking a solution of peace and coexistence, must clearly and resolutely align themselves with the forces fighting for democracy and freedom throughout the Middle East, including Iran.

The key to democratic change in Israel lies primarily in recognizing the Palestinians’ right to live in security, dignity, and equality. Let us turn the memory of Sameh Al-Asali—the victim of the Iranian missile attack—into a symbol of a shared struggle against war, for workers’ rights, human rights, and freedom throughout the region, including Israel-Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.

The post The Sole Fatality in Iran’s Missile Attack Was a Worker from Gaza first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Our national mood is a topic of extensive discussion in the Arab press. The Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, which supports Hezbollah, is checking our temperature daily. Its editor, Ibrahim al-Amin, knows everything about us and takes great pleasure in our anxiety. “The public in the Zionist entity [his term for Israel], including its military and security leadership, know that any attack by Iran or Hezbollah will not be aimed at civilians or civilian facilities,” he writes. Those who wish to believe him may find comfort in his words.

However, it’s ironic that this Lebanese journalist is less interested in looking at what’s happening in his own country. If he were true to his profession as a journalist, and not a propagandist, he would report that the same anxiety is also felt by the Lebanese themselves, many of whom have fled Beirut. They understand that Nasrallah is leading them toward another colossal disaster. The slogan “Enough – We’re Tired,” displayed on billboards across Lebanon, reflects the national mood.

As in the case of the Palestinians, so in the cases of Lebanon, Iran, and yes, Israel, there can be no viable state without leadership, without an economy, and without democracy.

Nasrallah’s solidarity with Gaza is indeed impressive. He has mobilized all his resources to engage Israel in a secondary campaign, trying to relieve Hamas.

Yet, Nasrallah has never shown such compassion for the Lebanese. In 2020, his explosives warehouses caught fire, causing a massive explosion that destroyed the port and part of the city. He consistently blocks the formation of a functioning government, wanting to determine its composition, and the result has been economic collapse. The Lebanese people are struggling to survive, with no electricity and no medicine, living hand-to-mouth. Despite this, Nasrallah remains indifferent, caring only for his close associates. The Lebanese are exhausted—they cannot withstand another war, lacking hospitals and civil defense. They believe Nasrallah prefers to avoid solving Lebanon’s crisis, using solidarity with Gaza as a cover. They especially don’t understand why they should bear the consequences of a war initiated by Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, whose goal is to eliminate the Palestinian Authority and ultimately hand the Palestinian people over to Iran.

We in Israel are not alone; our anxieties are also shared by those in distant Tehran. Like in Lebanon, the Iranian people are held hostage by the Ayatollah regime, which sows terror through the Revolutionary Guards. Like Lebanon, Iran is in a severe economic crisis, with one of the highest poverty rates in the world, skyrocketing unemployment, and crushing inflation. What the regime offers instead of a livelihood is the stale slogan “Death to America, Death to Israel.”

Not only Israel is far from Tehran, so is Gaza. The Iranian people don’t understand why they should sacrifice their lives for a cause that is primarily Arab. Hamas’s extreme religious ideology doesn’t resonate with Iranians, who launched a massive popular uprising after the regime murdered Mahsa Amini for wearing her headscarf improperly. The Iranian people are also clearly saying, “Enough – We’re Tired”: tired of the regime’s corruption, the state’s mismanagement, the sanctions, the regime’s intrusion into their private lives, and the restrictions on dancing, singing, and walking hand-in-hand with their partners in the park.

Similarly, in Israel, we tell each other—some loudly, some in whispers—“Enough, we’re tired.” The current government has plunged us into a deep, dark abyss, turning the question “What will be?” into the main topic of public discourse. Like the citizens of Lebanon and Iran, Israelis have also risen up against their government. Before October 7, they protested against Netanyahu’s intention to turn Israel into a “semi-dictatorship,” signaling his desire to integrate into the region and perpetuate his rule, much like the dictators in neighboring countries.

Perhaps the fatigue of the citizens, their distrust of their governments, and their aversion to war will eventually lead to a resolution in Gaza and the return of the hostages. Since the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, we’ve learned what the citizens of all three countries think, what they truly believe, and the level of public support their leaders have.

At first Netanyahu failed to suppress the rebellion and was forced to retreat under enormous public pressure. Yet the surprise attack by Hamas, with Iran’s encouragement and guidance, inadvertently quelled the protest in Israel. Dictatorial regimes view democracy, the right to organize and demonstrate, as a sign of weakness. The truth is the opposite. Only a strong, developing, and modern society can sustain a democratic regime and embrace its internal contradictions and debates. It’s important to clarify that Sinwar, Khamenei, and Nasrallah have imposed a war on Israelis, Iranians, and Lebanese—none of whom desire it.

While we’re on the topic of waiting, it’s likely that one of the reasons for the present delay in the Iranian attack (I write on August 15) is that both in Beirut and Tehran, citizens echo President Biden’s admonition: “Don’t.” The Israeli government also understands that its citizens are not eager for an all-out war. This is evident in Israel’s declaration that it has no territorial or other ambitions in Lebanon and prefers an agreement over war.

Perhaps the fatigue of the citizens, their distrust of their governments, and their aversion to war will eventually lead to a resolution in Gaza and the return of the hostages. Since the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, we’ve learned what the citizens of all three countries think, what they truly believe, and the level of public support their leaders have.

The outcome of the struggle in the Tehran-Beirut-Tel Aviv triangle will also determine the fate of the Palestinians. Although their leadership has caused a disaster of historic proportions, they are absent from the public arena. Hamas has elevated the Palestinian issue on the international stage, but a tragic result of this success has been that the Palestinians have identified with Hamas. By supporting Hamas and its actions, they have tied their fate to the Iranian regime that oppresses its people and to a sectarian Shiite organization that holds Lebanon by the throat. The Palestinians may have gained sympathy in global public opinion, but they have aligned themselves with the darkest and most dictatorial regimes.

Mahmoud Abbas’s visits to Putin and Sinwar’s complete dependence on Khamenei demonstrate the lack of historical vision that has characterized Palestinian leaderships throughout the generations. The pro-Palestinian demonstrations in the streets of New York and London, the recognition of the State of Palestine in Oslo and Madrid, and the lawsuit against Israel in The Hague do not solve the key issue: the lack of a leadership that could take these measures to a successful conclusion. Instead, the Palestinian leadership is divided, and the power struggle between its two factions has led to the terrible disaster we witness today. As in the case of the Palestinians, so in the cases of Lebanon, Iran, and yes, Israel, there can be no viable state without leadership, without an economy, and without democracy.

Meanwhile, Israel is not exempt from striving to resolve its conflict with the Palestinian people. The Achilles’ heel of the Iranian regime is undoubtedly the Iranian people; the Achilles’ heel of Hezbollah is the Lebanese people; and the Achilles’ heel of Israel is the oppression by occupation of the Palestinian people. Before October 7, the attempt to “manage” the conflict with the Palestinians, rather than resolve it, led the Israeli government to feed the Hamas monster, and this conflict has become the door through which the Iranian regime, under the guise of protecting the Palestinians, has entered our lives. The only way to prevent another October 7 and the nightmare of the current war is to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians.

Although trust between the two peoples has hit rock bottom, the understanding that continued control over another people will continue to determine the lives of Israelis, and that they will not find peace and stability until the Palestinians find theirs, is already seeping into the consciousness of a significant portion of the Israeli public. The Palestinians will have to part with their extreme religious messianism, and the Israelis will have to part with their extreme nationalist and messianic tendencies and reach a compromise based on democratic and liberal values, foremost among them the principle of equality.

The post Enough! We’re all tired first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Since 1948, Israel has nurtured an ethos according to which its very existence is imperiled. Even before it was born, the country was in danger of extinction because Syria, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan rose up to annihilate it.  Since then, a new oppressor has risen periodically, threatening to “throw us into the sea.” Once upon a time it was ‘Abd al-Nasser, and when he disappeared, it was Saddam Hussein. After Saddam was defeated with American help, it has become the turn of the Iranian tyrant, who is developing nuclear weapons to eliminate us and proclaim a Shiite victory throughout the Middle East.

In the past, however, it turned out that things were not quite as they were mooted. The monarchical and backward Arab regimes which invaded in 1948 did not truly intend to conquer Palestine, and their armies mirrored the weakness and decay of their regimes. In 1967, ‘Abd al-Nasser entered the war in an ill-conceived way and was utterly defeated. The “existential threat” turned out to have been imaginary, while Israel expanded its territory threefold. The bluff of Saddam Hussein was revealed when the Americans invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming he had “weapons of mass destruction.” What he had, it turned out, was a factory for cap pistols. This adventure cost the Americans many billions, with thousands of soldiers killed and wounded, and it took away their desire to continue fighting in the name of an “existential danger” to Israel.

Yes, the world is fed up with Israel’s “existential danger,” so Barack Obama decided to reach an agreement with Iran and limit its ability to develop nuclear weapons. Israel stomped its feet in anger. Netanyahu went all the way to the US Congress to incite against Obama, but in vain. Nothing helped until Donald Trump came on the scene, and Israel breathed a sigh of relief. The agreement with Iran was rescinded, Trump imposed severe sanctions on the Iranians, and the Mossad did in Iran as it pleased, from the assassination of scientists, through cyberattacks, to the theft of the nuclear archive.

The end is known – Trump was defeated by Biden, in Iran an even more radical president was elected, the centrifuges work overtime, and all parties to the original nuclear deal have returned to the table in Vienna. Once again, Israel is alone, and once again it is trying to convince the world that an “existential danger” is at its door.

But the world has moved on, and Iran’s existential threat to Israel has given way to more tangible existential threats. The Biden administration has set new priorities for the world, with three existential threats that demand vigorous, global action. The first is the climate crisis, which threatens the existence of life on earth. The second is the pandemic. And the third is the threat to democracy from totalitarian regimes like China and Russia, not to mention the neo-fascist currents headed by Donald Trump.

Iran’s place in the range of threats is marginal, and the new Israeli government’s cries of “existential danger” fall on deaf ears. For Israel, climate change is an anecdote, the pandemic is something we can live with, and there is no concern about totalitarianism. Israel’s conciliatory attitude toward the Chinese, its warm relationship with Putin, its longing for Trump, and its alliances with Bin Salman, al-Sisi, Abdullah, and the Emirates show where its heart is.

In fact, the “Abraham Accords” with the Gulf States tell the whole story. While Iran is verbally threatening Israel, in practice its eyes are fixed on the Arab regimes, led by Saudi Arabia, for which Iran really does pose an “existential danger.” It was this threat that threw them into the arms of Israel, with the generous assistance of Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Iran has managed to undermine Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon, all on the pretext of liberating Jerusalem. To judge from its actions on the ground, it poses an existential danger not to Israel, but to millions of Arab citizens who are forced to leave their countries and become refugees. Israel is not a target and never was. It is and was a pretext. Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon are the real targets, and they are paying the price for Iran’s expansionist aspirations.

At the same time, while the Iranian regime is playing the Israeli card to make gains abroad and suppress domestic opposition, in Israel the word “Iran” has become a code to continue inflating the defense budget at the expense of the resource-hungry sectors that are needed to reduce social gaps. However, the world is no longer buying the security bluff, and many Israelis are fed up with it too.

In an opinion piece against raising the budgetary pension for members of the standing army (Haaretz, November 28), Iris Leal writes: “In a land beset by enemies, everyone gripes about the cost of living, the labor market, wage gaps and the housing market, yet time and time again we vote on one issue along: security. Existential dread drives most of Israel’s citizenry, and the people’s army is the apple of their eye.”

To this Leal adds, “The overwhelming rage at Defense Minister Benny Gantz’s decision to raise the budgetary pension of already retired standing-army personnel surprised even him. Gantz is still living in times when every word uttered by the Israel Defense Forces is accepted as true by definition, every demand met, and every hint of resistance quelled through emotional blackmail and unsubtle warnings of the military catastrophe on the horizon.”

And what would the Israeli army have done if the sanctions imposed by Trump on the Iranian regime had indeed achieved their goal? What would have happened if a new Iranian “green revolution,” like the one suppressed by the regime in 2009, had established democracy there? There is one answer: the Arab Spring would have returned in full force. And what would have happened if the second revolutionary wave had overthrown al-Sisi’s regime while eliminating Iranian militias in Iraq and Hezbollah’s control of Lebanon? The answer is clear:  all of Israel’s autocratic allies in the region would have fallen, one after the other, starting with the Saudis. Democracy is the real existential threat to the Saudis and the Emirates, who supported all the coups to quell the Arab Spring. In the end, it is not the Iranian regime that poses an existential danger, but the possibility of a democratic revolution, which will raise the Arab world from its ruins, the same ruins that Israel and its accomplices thrive on.

The overthrow of the Iranian regime is an existential interest first and foremost for the Iranian people themselves, who suffer from political and cultural oppression, as well as deep poverty. It is also in the interest of the Arab peoples whose countries were destroyed by Iranian intervention. It is in the interest of the Palestinian people, who are groaning and fighting against Israel’s denial of their basic rights. In contrast, the Israeli interest is to keep the Middle East devastated, backward, poor and oppressed, in order to continue maintaining its schizophrenic regime, which ranges from democracy for Jews to apartheid for Palestinians. The world has already moved on to another era while Israel continues to educate itself from faded pages written during the Cold War, which depict it as the bulwark of the democratic West in a totalitarian sea. The world is changing, but Israel and its partners in the region, and with them the Iranian regime, remain mired in the past.

The post “Wolf! Wolf! Iran! Iran!“ first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Last November, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman visited Saudi Arabia, sat in a spacious armchair in the palace of Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, aka MBS, and went on to write a piece in The New York Times under the bombastic headline: “The Saudi Arab Spring, at last.” In fact, it was nothing more than an embarrassing, obsequious op-ed. It glorified the Saudi prince who described the economic reforms he was introducing into the kingdom as an “Arab Spring.” In practice, the archaic Saudi kingdom has been and remains the Number One Enemy of the Arab Spring. There is no connection between MBS’s reforms and real democratic change in the kingdom.

Recently, Friedman was invited by the Israel Defense Forces to act as the mouthpiece of the Israeli propaganda machine, warning of a war between Israel and Iran on Syrian soil. A very senior military officer (perhaps the Chief of Staff) openly admitted to Friedman that Israel had targeted a military base in Syria, an assault in which the head of the Revolutionary Guards drone unit, with the rank of colonel, was killed.

In other words, from Israel’s most senior officer to America’s most senior correspondent, Israel – without explicitly saying so – declared war on Iran. The Iranians had no choice but to “take off their kid gloves” and state via the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson that “the Zionist entity will receive an appropriate response.” It appears that the bad years in Israeli-Iranian relations are over and the worse are about to begin. What appears to be the end of the Syrian civil war is becoming, before our eyes, the beginning of a new war for the future of Syria, with Iran and Israel as major competitors.

Since the outbreak of the popular uprising against Assad, Iran mobilized in his favor and has done in Syria as it does at home. Israel, on the other hand, played the game of “neutrality”; its official position calls for “no interference in the Syrian civil war.” The meaning of this “balanced” position can be understood as follows: The genocide carried out by the Syrian regime is not Israel’s business. The longer the war lasts and the greater the destruction, the better for Israel.

This cynical game reached its peak in 2013, when US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, struck a deal on dismantling chemical weapons in Syria, following a large-scale chemical attack in the Ghouta suburbs. The assault, which claimed more than 1400 lives, crossed President Obama’s “red line,” and the US administration vowed to respond militarily. But Obama shilly-shallied. Putin jumped at the opportunity, and instead of an air strike against Assad’s regime, Obama agreed to a dubious accord to disarm Syria of its chemical weapons.

Assad took advantage of the non-attack and continued to massacre civilians by more conventional means. The Netanyahu government celebrated the removal of the chemical threat to the citizens of Israel, where the era of gas masks ended. The chemical deal was accompanied by the flight of millions of Syrians from their homes because of murderous, indiscriminate bombings, and the Syrian refugee crisis changed the political map in Europe. But Israel’s worldview was and remains very narrow: The deal is good for the Jews even though it is bad for both the Syrians and those countries to which millions of them have fled.

Israel was not the only land to celebrate the miserable deal which freed Obama from having to attack and saved Assad. Iran also celebrated. The accord to dismantle chemical weapons in Syria turned into a prototype for dismantling the Iranian nuclear program, an accord that Israel strongly opposed and was unable to block. Iran became an ally of the United States and a legitimate player in the war against ISIS. Iran also partnered with Assad and the Russians in the war against the Syrian opposition. For seven years, Iran sank huge sums into reviving the Syrian economy; Hezbollah turned into a major player in the civil war, losing 1700 fighters; and Iran bankrolled Shiite militias in Iraq to the tune of 20,000 fighters. Throughout that period, Israel took delight in seeing Hezbollah hemorrhage in Syria and become too bogged down to engage Israel. Its air force thwarted the transfer of “game-changing” weapons from Iran to Hezbollah – with the silent acquiescence of the Russians.

Not only did Iran gain a foothold in Syria but the Russians, invited in by Assad, became the real landlords there. They carried out horrific aerial attacks on Syrian cities, the foremost being Aleppo, and saved Assad’s regime from certain defeat. Here, too, Israel looked on from the sidelines and did not utter a word about atrocities occurring just kilometers from its northern border. Netanyahu decided that the best strategy was to maintain a secure hotline with Putin.

The agreement with Putin is simple: Israel will not act to topple Assad and will not object to the Russian takeover of Syria. In exchange, it seeks freedom to act against attempts to transfer arms from Iran to Hezbollah. Putin, for his part, wants Israel to accept the Russian presence in Syria, but this presence also requires close cooperation with Iran. A Russian presence requires Iran’s consent because Russia does not have many boots on the ground; without Iran, Assad’s regime will again be in danger of collapse.

Israel has no interest in seeing Assad toppled. In this respect it is in lockstep not only with Russia, but with the Americans. After the unconvincing air strike in response to Assad’s recent chemical attack in Douma, the Americans declared that they had no intention of replacing Assad. In fact, Assad has gained immunity from all factions operating in Syria and continues to survive as Syria bleeds. So we have reached a situation in which no one wants to overthrow Assad; every player needs him to serve its own interests. Israel wants to go back to the status quo ante consisting of the long-term cease-fire it has enjoyed since the 1973 war. Iran has completely opposite plans: Seeking to become a regional power, it is creating an Iranian corridor through Iraq and Syria to the Lebanese coast. Israel must accept the fact that Assad’s Syria exists in theory alone and that the country is divided between Iran, Turkey, the United States and Russia.

Israel’s attempts to pry the Iranians from Syria are leading to a head-on collision with them and indirectly with the Russians. The Israeli message to the Russians is straightforward: If you want to keep Assad in power in order to gain legitimacy for your airbase in Khmeimim and a naval base in Tartous, get rid of the Iranians. The choice is either Assad or Iran, Israel will not allow any arrangement at the expense of its strategic interest.

However, despite warm relations between Netanyahu and Trump, and the latter’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, Trump’s announcement that he intends to withdraw from Syria “very soon” leaves Israel, on its 70th birthday, flying solo. It seems that Teheran is not interested in an open war with Israel, given stiff domestic opposition to its Syrian adventure. Putin also is afraid of opening a front against Israel, while Netanyahu is reluctant to involve the IDF and the home front in a war that could prove to be costly and destructive. It might be impossible to square the circle: each side is entrenched in its position, and all of them together are being pushed to the edge against their will.

The Syrian Spring broke out with the hope of regime change and the establishment of a modern democratic state. Assad gassed civilians; Iran enlisted Hezbollah; Putin built military bases to expand his empire; Obama refused to support the democratic Syrian opposition; Saudi Arabia and Qatar armed extreme Sunni militias; Israel watched and relished; all of them wiped out any hope for a democratic future in Syria. The only way to stop further bloodshed, and a war between Israel and Iran, is the withdrawal of all foreign forces. If there is any hope for a democratic future in Syria, Assad must go. Currently this option is not on the agenda. Trump, Erdogan, Putin, Khamenei, and Netanyahu do not believe in democracy. Syria has become a reflection of the world at the beginning of the 21st century.

* Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post Israel’s undeclared war on Iran first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Still bodies of babies, women and children, murdered by the chlorine gas – these are the recent victory pictures that Bashar Assad wants us to remember. Assad triumphed the Syrian people, he triumphed Syria and the human spirit. Five years ago, the butcher from Damascus has slaughtered more than one thousand Syrian civilians in Eastern Ghouta and crossed the red line posed by President Obama. However, he was saved from a military blow thanks to his accomplice, President Putin, which reached an agreement with Obama to disarm the Syrian regime from chemical weapon. Obama already completed his two presidential terms and the British Cameron resigned from his post, but Assad, Khamenei and Putin are here to stay, together with the poisonous gas which kill the poor who did not manage to find a haven.

These are the hands of Assad that kill and poison the Syrian people, but the responsibility lies upon the Turkish-Iranian-Russian Trinity whose leaders met a couple of days ago in Ankara to divide the booty. They agreed to divide Syria and leave Assad in power despite his responsibility for the destruction of the state and to the flee of millions of Syrians, hereby providing him the political legitimacy to annihilate the people of Douma.

Some people wonder why Assad used the gas against helpless men and women while Douma is besieged and ISIS started negotiating on leaving the town and giving it to the Russians. The answer is quite simple: Assad wanted to enforce himself on his allies. Whereas Russian wanted to skip Assad in the negotiations, whereas the Trinity wanted to ignore him in discussing the solution, his reply was immediate: Douma would have to surrender to Assad and the most practical way to accomplish this task would be using the chlorine gas.

The other half of the answer to this question is simple too. Since using a chemical weaponry against the people of Eastern Ghouta five years ago, Assad found out that there are no more red lines. The Russian cover on the one hand, and the unwillingness of the US and its allies to act decisively to stop the atrocities on the other hand, enabled him to do whatever he pleased, without paying the price for his crimes. Thus, Assad, Putin and Erdogan, along any despicable rule across the globe, knew that all means are legitimate to retain their rule: murder, destruction, exiling people and the use of chemical weapon were proved to be efficient, hereby becoming the winning cards who have saved the evil regime.

What is going in Syria serves as a pretext at the hands of Israel’s government following the fact that the international community condemned Israel for killing Palestinian demonstrators across the border between Israel and Gaza. Israel’s Defense Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, accuses the world of hypocrisy as the latter accuses Israel but refrains from accusing Russia and the Syrian regime. Moreover, Lieberman draws a comparison between the “humanitarian” approach of the Israeli occupation and the cruelty of the Arab regimes, boasting in Israel’s democracy vis-à-vis the tyrannies in the neighboring countries.

The truth is that Lieberman, like his right-wing government, is indifferent to the atrocities in Syria, although he has influence over determining the fate of Syria and its regime through his tight coordination with the Russians. Israel’s refusal to join the US and the EU in condemning Russia for its use in gas against the Russian spy on British soil, is not less hypocritic than the way other countries are conducting. Assad’s cruelty against the Syrians doesn’t justify the cruelty of Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian people as well as the fact that for fifty years Israel is busy in violating the political and civil rights of the Palestinians.

The Daam party condemns the Syrian regime and its allies and call upon the people of conscience, along with the friends of the Palestinian people, who support its rights and freedom, to endorse the Syrian people and its noble revolution against the evil regime of Assad. Whoever refuses to resist the despot, whoever justifies regime’s war crimes in the name of the struggle against Zionism and imperialism, loses the moral, political and legal basis to condemn Israel which is oppressing the Palestinian people. The fate of the Palestinians is bound with the fate of the Arab people, first and foremost the Syrian people. As long as the Arab people will be subordinated to tyrannical regimes – in Egypt, Syria, Jordan or Iraq – the Palestinian people will continue to be occupied. The collapse of Israel’s occupation depends on the collapse of the despotic Arab regimes, first and foremost the Syrian one.

The post Assad’s war against the human spirit first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

What is happening today in Iran proves that the Spring is alive and well. In fact, we may trace its beginning to Iran in 2009, where it was triggered by election-rigging in Ahmadinejad’s camp. Two years later it spread like wildfire throughout the Arab world. Two regional oil powers, Saudi Arabia and Shiite fundamentalist Iran, did everything possible to drown the Spring in blood. Saudi Arabia financed the coup of General Sisi in Egypt, and Iran backed Assad’s efforts to wipe out the Syrian revolution. Hostility toward the Spring was shared equally by the Saudi and Iranian regimes, but Iran seemed to have the upper hand in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria – the Shia Crescent that keeps Israel awake at night.

Everything seemed finished: Saudi Arabia up to its neck in Yemen; Syria carved up among the victors (Putin, Erdogan and Khamenei); and Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, Saudi Arabia’s long-time ally, aligning himself with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Suddenly, however, Iranian workers, students and young people took to the streets and spoiled the party. The paradox is that Iranian “triumphs” hastened the outbreak of the current demonstrations. Unlike the Green Movement that broke out in Tehran in 2009, the current protests are not calling just for reform of the Islamic regime, rather they are demanding its overthrow.

On the diplomatic front, Iran’s moderate reformist president, Hassan Rouhani, could pat himself on the back after the signing of the nuclear agreement with the Obama administration. The Iranian people put their faith in Rouhani. He managed to get rid of most economic sanctions on Iran, but on the other hand, he allowed Major General Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force, to conduct his adventures in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. The sanctions were lifted, Iran returned to being an oil economy, which initially grew by 12%, and the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria was over.

The problem lies in the fact that economic growth did not trickle down. Daily life remains tough, and the annual budget submitted by Rouhani slashed subsidies on food and fuel. The public realized that oil revenues were being used to finance Soleimani’s adventures. Thousands of Iranians have poured into the streets protesting against Hezbollah, Hamas and Shiite militias in Iraq and Yemen. They are attacking the Iranian leadership because they feel that the military ventures have taken priority over the people’s welfare.

Today, many clever people are celebrating at the expense of the Iranian regime. They are led by the Saudis, Trump, and Netanyahu. The joy may be premature, however. Not because the demonstrations have still not swelled into a general revolt, but because the fall of the Iranian regime will benefit not the Saudis, nor Trump, nor Netanyahu. Iran’s fiscal difficulties stem from the same structural problems that Saudi Arabia suffers (even though the Saudis are dealing with them in a different way.) Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman staged a palace coup and called for the modernization of his economy. The plan, Vision 2030, is intended to deal with the plunge in oil prices, which has spawned a budget deficit. Nevertheless, many pundits doubt his ability to make the necessary changes without an overhaul of the kingdom.

Despite their differences, Saudi Arabia and Iran are running a similar economic system of centralization in favor of the ruling class. In the case of the Saudis, it’s all about the royal court and those close to it. In the Iranian case, it’s about the Revolutionary Guards and those close to them. In both countries, the religious establishment is the final arbiter of law and lifestyle. Modesty patrols invade the private lives of citizens, and freedom of speech is limited to statements that do not harm the regime and “public sentiment.” Needless to say, interpreting “public sentiment” is in the hands of religious scholars alone. The two countries, Saudi Arabia and Iran, are hungry for foreign investment to diversify their economies, but corruption and severe restrictions on freedom drive potential investors away. Saudi Arabia and Iran both rely on oil exports to finance an Islamic welfare state, blocking the technological revolution which drives the economic engine of the 21st century.

The third industrial revolution, built on renewable energy and the Internet, makes oil economies irrelevant. At a time when traditional industries are losing ground to advanced manufacturing based on technology and renewable energy, Arab regimes and the Iranians are becoming an obstacle to economic development. They are sentencing most of their citizens to a life of backwardness and poverty. The origins of the Iranian and Arab Spring have roots in the failure of neoliberal economic regimes to ensure the welfare of the citizens, not only in the Middle East but also in Western economies and, first and foremost, the US itself. The fact that the Saudis succeeded in thwarting the Egyptian revolution, and the Iranians in thwarting the Syrian revolution, is temporary. The Spring will not skip over them.

The collapse of the Iranian regime, if it occurs, is liable to remove the “strategic threat” that has made Netanyahu’s entire career. In any case, the Iranian threat is more an Israeli fantasy than reality. Israel has been Iran’s excuse to expand its influence in the Arab world. The Iranian revolution has challenged the Saudi kingdom for hegemony in the Islamic world. Iran and Hezbollah inscribed “Jerusalem” on their banner in order to conquer Aleppo, Mosul, Sana’a, and Beirut.

The fall of the Iranian regime would catalyze the collapse of other dictators in the Middle East, such as Egypt’s Sisi, Syria’s Assad, and eventually the Saudi regime. The last seeks to sidestep this destiny by trying to build a modern economy layered on an archaic regime, but it cannot work. The Iranian threat will be removed from Israel, and in its place there will be a much greater threat: without nuclear weapons, without fundamentalist ideology, but equipped with weapons of knowledge and freedom of information. Let’s call it the threat of the new Arab Democracy.

The State of Israel is very invested in threats, and it has a strong army that identifies and deals with them. However, IDF intelligence failed to predict the revolution in Egypt, just as it did not foresee the first intifada 30 years ago. The concept of Arab civil society, modern economics, democratic government, the entry of the Arab world into the 21st century through renewable energy, and the internet revolution are not considered a possibility. The statement by Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman that” democracy does not suit the Arabs” is a guiding light for Israel.

The fact is that Israel, the start-up nation and the “only democracy in the Middle East,” views benighted regimes such as the military dictatorship in Egypt and the Saudi royal family as strategic allies, and their possible fall as an immediate and tangible danger. In the Arab region, a reality will be created in which the “only democracy in the Middle East” will be judged according to what it is: a colonialist and fundamentalist state, a remnant of the last century. And who knows, perhaps the Spring will also knock on its door.

*Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post The Iranian threat is in danger first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.