New York Times: Thomas Friedman: This is my current view of the war on Iran
In his article in New York Times on Monday, Thomas Friedman stressed that the complexities that characterize the situation in the Middle East force thinking about several aspects at once, in order to try to deconstruct what is happening and understand it in the right framework.
Friedman added that the Middle East is a region intertwined in terms of religion, politics, oil, and sometimes internecine conflicts, which makes it difficult to adopt a clear and specific vision of the wars ravaging the region.
He came up with several ideas in an attempt to understand the ongoing war, the first of which is that the attempt to overthrow the Iranian regime, which he described as a priesthood, succeeds in Tehran, considering that this regime is responsible for killing and destroying a great civilization and destabilizing the region.
Replacing this regime could put the Middle East on a more just and inclusive path, while empowering the Iranian people to self-determination, according to Friedman.
However, Friedman stressed that this process won’t be easy, because the Iranian regime is deeply entrenched and cannot be overthrown by air strikes alone.
He gave an example of this with the Gaza war, where Israel has not been able to eliminate Hamas once and for all despite a long period of air and ground wars.
Even if US and Israeli strikes don’t lead to a popular uprising in Iran as President Donald Trump has called for, they could lead to unforeseen outcomes such as the emergence of a new Islamic republic that is less threatening to its neighbors.
Replacing this regime could put the Middle East on a more just and inclusive path, while empowering the Iranian people to self-determination, but this process won’t be easy
However, it makes clear that what is happening can have the opposite effect, as it can easily lead to unforeseen dangers, such as Iran’s disintegration as a single geographical entity.
Friedman emphasizes that the timing of the end of the war depends heavily on the oil and financial markets, rather than on the military situation inside Iran.
On the one hand, Iran is going through a severe economic crisis with its currency that has lost value, and the European economy has become more dependent on liquefied natural gas from the Persian Gulf.
Inflation caused by rising energy prices could anger Trump’s grassroots base, which would affect how Trump deals with Iran.
As for the US president, he doesn’t want to see the word swamp in any headline bearing his name before November’s midterm elections.
Friedman warns that war shouldn’t distract anyone from the threats to democracy and the rule of law that both President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu face.
He explains that Trump is seeking to promote democracy in Tehran while implementing controversial policies in America, such as attempts to restrict voting rights, as well as immigration agents.
Friedman also believes that the war may be politically advantageous for Netanyahu, who may use the fall of the Iranian regime to consolidate his power and achieve his political goals.
He has won short-term military victories against Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and Iran, but none of them have translated into long-term diplomatic or political gains.
To do so, Friedman continues, he would need to agree to negotiate again with the Palestinians based on the framework of a two-state solution.
