How does Iran respond to Israel?
Ahmad R Taheri, in an interview with Hayat’s political reporter, regarding possibility of peace between Iran and Israel, said: There are different solutions, but the problem is that these soultions can be in conflict with the ideologies of the two states. For example, some experts raise the issue of diplomacy and trust building. This approach is possible, but it may cost the ideological principles and beliefs of the two states. On how Iran should react to Israeli attacks, he said: Some experts recommend military or aggressive measures against the Israeli bases or officials, but this approach fails to address the core issue, which could lead to further attacks and assassinations from both sides. In light of the aforementioned considerations, Taheri continued, Iran can follow two approaches to address this problem. First, Iran should improve its security capabilities to identify and thwart potential threats. Second, Iran can use its leverage of regional influence and bargaining power to gain the support of influential states and actors to reduce tensions with Israel.
Taheri also added, it should be reminded that Israel and the United States are working to limit Iran’s support for militant groups that they perceive as a threat. Contrary to some experts’ views that, he argued, Iran should reduce support for these groups to ease tensions with Israel, Iran’s support of regional militias is important for its strategic interests. He further argued, it is in Iran’s strategic interest to maintain its support for regional militias. If Iran becomes weak in terms of security, military strength, and economy, Israel will be more likely to carry out subversive operations against Iran.
Regarding changes in Hamas’ political and military strategies by choosing Yahya Sinwar, Ahmad R Taheri said: Considering the assassination of Haniyeh in Iran and the events that have taken place, it seems that Sinwar may have a more aggressive approach towards Israel. Therefore, it is not out of the question that he may carry out operations against the Israelis inside and outside of Israel. Military training and obtaining more weapons to strengthen Hamas’ ability to confront Israel will remain a priority for Hamas leaders.
Regarding how the Sinwar’s leadership will impact Hamas’ relations with other Palestinian groups and regional states, Taheri asserted: It depends on the circumestances and the states. One hypothesis may be that because Sinwar has a far more radical position, he may face more difficultity to achieve unity between Hamas and other Palestinian factions. An alternative hypothesis, according to Taheri, is that Sinwar’s coming may be seen as a sign of Hamas’s commitment to resistance. Thereby, this may increase his popularity among different groups. Additionally, Sinwar’s close ties with Iran could potentially strain Hamas’ relations with states that have not established normal relations with Iran.
Regarding the future of Hamas, Taheri said: It is complicated to predict the future of Hamas, because the region where Hamas operates is unstable and changing. Apart from that, the type of support for Hamas is significant; the extent to which Hamas is supported has a very important role in the future of Hamas. Also, how Hamas interacts with regional and global actors is crucial. Therefore, any eventuality from transformation to development may happen to Hamas.
Published in Persian on www.hayat.ir/x4gzb and translated to English by TECODH. 15 September 2024.