The Language of Lies!
The language of politics is rife with deception, encompassing a wide array of maneuvers, evasions, exaggerations, and pleasantries, more so than any other form of discourse.
Often, states resort to excessive lying, media warfare, and political maneuvering merely to buy time.
Iran’s political language is characterized by blatant dishonesty to an egregious degree. Tehran shuffles between weak posturing by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), directives attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei, the heir apparent to the Supreme Leader’s position, and his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Meanwhile, President Masoud Pezeshkian appears to be little more than a political figurehead devoid of real decision-making power. Nevertheless, deception and evasion remain intrinsic components of Iran’s political behavior.
Water
Time and Calendars
Weather Service
The Mullah regime deserves pity; prominent religious and military figures from the IRGC have been eliminated in scenes that reflect defeat more than victory. The theocratic system is fundamentally built upon its religious and revolutionary symbols, many of which are now buried.
In contrast, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states have demonstrated advanced military deterrence capabilities against direct Iranian aggression or attacks conducted through proxies and agents, particularly in Iraq, as well as in response to blatant aggression through military engagements undertaken by some Gulf states.
During the war, Tehran also betted on exerting political and diplomatic pressure on Gulf states to halt US strikes, only to later revert to threatening to expand the conflict to intimidate the Gulf states. However, neither military nor political calculations favor Iran in any way.
If Iran were to directly target Gulf states militarily, or through its proxies, would US and Gulf calculations remain as they were before the ceasefire? Certainly not.
Military confrontation with Gulf states would provide Washington with new objectives that go beyond those announced before, during, and even throughout the negotiation phase. This could lead to a decisive decision to overthrow the Mullah regime.
US objectives might also evolve to include strikes against militias in Iraq, as part of efforts to end the proliferation of weapons and curtail Iran’s expanding political, sectarian, and social influence within Iraq.
The war with Iran is not merely rhetorical; there is no room for suppressing emotions or denying facts and realities.
Iran has undoubtedly lost the Gulf states, making the restoration of relations extremely difficult, especially since the Mullah regime and its revolutionary constitution pose a concern for the Iranian people, Gulf states, and the entire region.
It is only a matter of time before the fragility of Iranian lies is exposed, the scenarios of evasion and procrastination end, and the illusions of victory dissipate. Political and military decisions, as well as decisions on war and peace, are made in Washington rather than in Tehran.
