Irani: The cost of American support to the Israeli regime is increasing exponentially

According to the foreign policy group Tasnim news agency, Amir Saeed Irvani, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations, discussed the latest developments in Palestine and the war against the people of Gaza in an interview with “Newsweek”. He also explained Iran’s policy towards the Palestinian issue.

The full text of the Iranian representative’s interview with “Newsweek” is as follows:

Question: Iran has repeatedly denied any direct involvement in the Al-Aqsa Storm operation carried out by Hamas against Israel on October 7, but Iranian officials have supported the operation. announced and emphasized the historical role of this country in supporting the resistance efforts against Israel. To what extent was Iran closely coordinated with Hamas and other Palestinian factions such as Islamic Jihad in the lead up to and after the start of the Al-Aqsa storm?

Irvani: Until the victory of the Islamic revolution in Iran (1979), Palestinian militant groups mainly had socialist tendencies. The formation of Hamas and Islamic Jihad was derived from the influence of the Islamic movement of the Iranian revolution, which created a self-belief in them that they can stand against the occupier and win. The bitter experience of the defeat of the Arab governments in the wars of 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973 and 1982 had made the spirit of Yas prevail over the Arab countries, which no longer have the strength to fight with Israel. The formation of the Camp David Conference was a turning point in the movement of the Arab countries from the path of struggle to the path of compromise to enter into a deal with Israel, to take back a part of their occupied territories and give this regime a peace commitment in return. The emergence of Islamic resistance groups in Lebanon and Palestine at such a time was an ominous phenomenon for Israel. Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon (2000) and Gaza (2005) were not in exchange for an agreement, but due to resistance pressure. After that, Israel’s inability to fight the resistance groups from 2006 until now sounded the alarm for the future of this regime, and Israel considers all of this to be the result of the Iranian Islamic Revolution, which changed the course of history for Israel.

The cause of Palestine is part of the DNA of the cause of the Islamic Revolution. The common goal is to end the occupation and assert the rights of the Palestinian people, but each Palestinian group has its own strategies and tactics. After Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza, Hamas entered the election campaign to take over the administration of Gaza to be active in both political and jihadist fields, which of course implied the tacit acceptance of the Madrid Conference. But the Islamic Jihad organization did not accept it and simply continued the Jihad path. Based on this, each of the sides of the resistance front, while having a general coordination with each other, act independently and in the form of their own national and organizational definition in the decision-making of design and tactics. In the Al-Aqsa storm operation, the military department of Hamas independently decided, designed and implemented.

Question: What Is something dangerous for Iran in the current war in Gaza? Is Iran seeking to take advantage of Israel, which is caught in a long and costly conflict, and will Israel’s quick victory in removing the Palestinian armed groups from Gaza be a defeat for the resistance axis?

Irvani: The most important issue for the Islamic Republic of Iran is to save the lives of civilians. Jihadi groups have chosen the path of struggle and have consciously entered this path and borne the costs of struggle for themselves and their families, but ordinary people, especially women and children, should not be victims of war. Iran’s insistence on an immediate and lasting ceasefire means an end to the bombings and killing of civilians in Gaza. The war between the resistance and Israel will continue until the end of the occupation, but the field of this war should not be extended to civilians. The military power of the Palestinian resistance is not for the collapse and elimination of Israel, but for preventing the expansion of the occupation and forcing this regime to evacuate the occupied territories.

Resistance in It is equal to the occupation of a culture, and not only will it not subside when the leaders and mujahids are killed, but their blood will strengthen the resistance and more mujahids will choose the path of resistance. Certainly, Israel cannot destroy Hamas, but with the killing it has done, the power of resistance will come to the fore, either in the form of new fighters joining Hamas or a new fledgling group. The form of Hamas’s political presence in Palestine may change, but the military power of Hamas will definitely continue its development process. We believe that the Palestinian crisis does not have a military solution, the only way is to end the occupation and adhere to the principle of self-determination for the Palestinian people.

Question: The Israeli authorities have told us that they will not tolerate a return to the situation before October 7th, not only in Gaza, but also on the northern front with Hezbollah in Lebanon, and they seek to neutralize the Iranian threat. Are you worried that Israel might increase its actions to change the reality on this border or target Iran itself?

Irvani: Israel does not have the power to invade without the unconditional support of the United States, and with the prolongation of the Gaza war, the cost of this support for the United States is increasing exponentially. is an increase Either America should condition and limit this support or become a victim of the ambition of Israel’s rulers. Israel has become very costly for America; The material, political, and above all moral and credit cost in the public opinion of the world in such a situation is not required by the interests of the United States, nor the ability of Israel to go to a new war. Netanyahu sees his political life in the continuation of the Gaza war, and Biden sees his re-election in ending the Gaza war, this conflict of interest will not be manageable as the war drags on. Iran will never start a war with any country. Basically, preventive war strategy has no place in Iran’s defense policy, but it is at the highest level of readiness to react to any threat and defend the country, its citizens and interests.

Irvani: We think America should have a fundamental review of its national security strategy towards the Middle East region. 22 years ago, the United States marched into Afghanistan with the permission of the Security Council to destroy Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, what was the result?! Thousands of billions of material costs, several thousand war dead and disabled, the failure of the credibility of the American army and intelligence structure, and finally an agreement with the Taliban for their return to power in Afghanistan. The same thing happened in Iraq. 20 years ago, he marched into Iraq without the permission of the Security Council to overthrow Saddam’s government and make Iraq a model for the region by building a state and a nation. Their idea was to welcome the American forces as the saviors of Iraq and the people of this country with the hatred that exists among the Iraqi people towards Saddam’s crimes, but what was the result? They suffered more losses in Iraq than in Afghanistan. The same thing will happen in Syria.

The solution is to improve cognitive understanding. As long as they think that this resistance against them is determined by Iran or elsewhere, they cannot solve the problem. They thought that with the assassination of the commander of the Quds Force, the obstacles on their way would be removed, but not only this did not happen, but their security was exposed to danger more than before. After this assassination, the US government at the time threatened that if Iran responded militarily, it would attack 53 targets, indicating the number of US diplomats at the time of the occupation of the US embassy in Iran (1979). Before burying General Soleimani, Iran targeted the American military base in Iraq directly from Iranian soil and threatened that if you have a military response, you will receive a stronger response. They sent a message that the president discussed the issue in the oval room with military and national security advisers and preferred to go to sleep. He lost his soft power and to make up for it, he sought hard power and put himself in danger of military presence. American military bases in the region are part of the problem of the region and not part of the solution, and it is necessary to reach this strategic conclusion whether the national interests of the United States have been defeated and experienced in the continuation of this wrong policy or choosing a new path. The choice is theirs.

end of message/