Certainly, let’s explore how Trita Parsi, in Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States, illuminates the covert cooperation between Iran and Israel during the rule of Ayatollah Khomeini. His work provides a nuanced account of the pragmatic, complex, and often paradoxical interactions between these two states, which defy the straightforward narratives of enmity that dominate popular perception.
The Paradox of Cooperation Amidst Ideological Conflict
To understand this unlikely cooperation, it's essential to consider the historical context. When Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini took power in Iran in 1979 after the Islamic Revolution, the shift in Iranian governance was profound. Iran transformed from a monarchy with strong Western ties under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to an Islamic Republic, founded on principles that fundamentally opposed both the U.S. and its allies, including Israel. This ideological shift was rooted in Khomeini’s condemnation of Israel as a symbol of Western imperialism and oppression in the Middle East, and he firmly rejected Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.
However, as Parsi reveals, ideological commitments did not completely dictate Iran’s foreign policy. Instead, both Iran and Israel exhibited a pragmatic willingness to collaborate under certain conditions, even when official rhetoric remained hostile. This realpolitik approach, driven by each country’s geopolitical and security concerns, was essential for both states' strategic interests, especially amid the uncertainties of the early 1980s.
Shared Concerns Over Iraq: The Driving Factor
The primary factor behind this covert cooperation was a shared fear of Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Iraq’s ambitions for regional dominance and the expansion of its military power presented a significant threat to both Iran and Israel. Following the Islamic Revolution, the regional power dynamic shifted, creating a precarious balance in which Iraq emerged as a common enemy for both Tehran and Tel Aviv. In particular, the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) forced Iran to seek unconventional alliances to defend itself against Saddam’s aggression.
Parsi’s research reveals that Israel, although officially opposed to the newly Islamic regime in Tehran, saw an opportunity to counterbalance Iraq by providing Iran with military assistance. Israel feared Iraq’s aspirations to develop a nuclear capability and expand its conventional military might, perceiving Saddam’s regime as a larger and more immediate threat to its own security. Therefore, while the Iranian leadership vocally condemned Israel, it also quietly accepted Israeli support to combat Iraqi forces, especially during the critical early years of the Iran-Iraq War.
Operation Seashell: The Secret Arms Transfers
One of the most compelling examples of this behind-the-scenes cooperation is Israel’s role in providing Iran with military supplies and intelligence. During the Iran-Iraq War, Iran struggled to acquire arms, as many countries had imposed embargoes on the newly established Islamic Republic. Desperate for military supplies, Iran turned to the black market and unconventional sources for arms procurement. Israel, for its part, viewed this as a chance to weaken Iraq by indirectly supporting Iran.
Operation Seashell, which Parsi describes in detail, was a covert operation that involved the shipment of Israeli arms to Iran. Conducted primarily in the early 1980s, Operation Seashell facilitated the transfer of American-made weapons originally obtained by Israel to the Iranian military. The shipments included ammunition, spare parts for U.S.-made tanks and planes, and artillery, all crucial for Iran’s sustained engagement against Iraqi forces. The United States, while publicly supporting Iraq, also tacitly allowed some of these transactions in a bid to maintain a level of influence in Iran and avoid a complete tilt in the region’s power balance.
Pragmatism Over Ideology: The Israeli and Iranian Calculus
Parsi’s analysis emphasizes that the clandestine relationship between Israel and Iran was not born of mutual affinity but mutual utility. Both states prioritized pragmatic considerations over ideological fidelity, a pattern that was particularly evident in Israeli policymakers’ thinking. For Israel, the destabilization of Iraq was far more important than sustaining a consistently hostile posture toward Iran. Iran, despite its public anti-Israel stance, also saw the advantage of accepting assistance from Tel Aviv to maintain its defensive capabilities against a relentless Iraqi offensive.
Moreover, Israeli leaders understood that a weakened Iraq would allow Iran and Israel to avoid direct conflict with one another. If Iran became a dominant regional power, Israel believed it could maintain a quiet coexistence with Tehran, especially if both states found themselves in need of strategic depth against Arab adversaries.
The Iran-Contra Affair and Israel’s Role
The most infamous episode involving covert Israel-Iran cooperation is the Iran-Contra affair, a scandal that exposed the depth of back-channel diplomacy and clandestine arms transfers involving Israel, Iran, and the United States. In the mid-1980s, the U.S. administration under President Reagan attempted to use Israeli channels to sell arms to Iran in exchange for help in freeing American hostages held by Hezbollah in Lebanon. Part of the proceeds from these arms sales was then secretly diverted to fund the Contras, an anti-communist rebel group in Nicaragua, circumventing the U.S. Congress’s restrictions on funding the Contras.
Israel played a critical intermediary role, coordinating the transfer of U.S. arms to Iran and acting as a liaison between the Reagan administration and the Iranian government. This episode, though scandalous when publicly revealed, illustrated the pragmatic willingness of both Israel and Iran to engage in cooperation when it served their interests. Parsi argues that the Iran-Contra affair demonstrated the extent to which both countries were willing to pursue realpolitik, even as they publicly denounced each other.
Ideological Shifts and the End of Cooperation
While the collaboration between Iran and Israel was significant, it was also temporary. By the late 1980s, a shift in regional dynamics and in Iranian leadership reduced the willingness to engage in such pragmatic cooperation. Parsi notes that Ayatollah Khomeini’s death in 1989 and the subsequent rise of Ali Khamenei and Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani as Iran’s Supreme Leader and President, respectively, marked the beginning of a more cohesive anti-Israel stance within the Iranian government. Additionally, with Iraq significantly weakened by the end of the Iran-Iraq War and the onset of the Gulf War in 1991, Iran’s security calculations changed, and the basis for its cooperation with Israel largely dissipated.
The ideological divide that had been muted during times of crisis resurfaced as Iran no longer required Israel’s assistance. From the early 1990s onward, Iran adopted an increasingly aggressive stance against Israel, aligning itself more closely with anti-Israel Arab movements and positioning itself as a defender of Palestinian interests.
Conclusion
Treacherous Alliance sheds light on an oft-overlooked chapter in Middle Eastern geopolitics, revealing that ideological opponents can and do set aside their differences when faced with common threats. The covert dealings between Israel and Iran during Ayatollah Khomeini’s rule highlight how survival and security concerns can drive unlikely partnerships, often transcending seemingly unbridgeable ideological divides. This history underlines a core theme in Parsi’s work: that Middle Eastern politics is rarely black-and-white, and alliances are often fluid, shaped by complex regional dynamics rather than solely by ideology.
As Parsi concludes, the pragmatic cooperation between Israel and Iran, while temporary, demonstrates that even adversaries can find common ground when it serves their national interests. This nuanced perspective is essential for understanding not only the historical relationship between these two nations but also the broader nature of Middle Eastern geopolitics, where shifting alliances and rivalries are frequently shaped by a blend of pragmatism and ideology.
No comments:
Post a Comment