Please let us know how we are doing by contacting us here.
On Monday night, March 27, 7 missiles were launched from Yemen to Saudi Arabia lands. Saudi Arabia announced that it had intercepted and destroyed missiles in the sky, but as a result of strike one person was killed and another injured.
Following the attack, although the Houthis took the responsibility, all evidence point to the Iran regime’s share in the strike.
Coincident of the strike with the Issue of the US deadline over the Iran nuclear deal has increased the regional and international crisis mainly created by the clerical regime ruling Iran.
Now the main question is: What message did the missiles carry? And besides that, is the denial of the Iran regime over its intervention in the attack convincing? Houthi rebels are not part of an advanced army and cannot handle all the procedure of procurement, producing, maintenance and launching missiles by themselves.
Nicki Haley has previously shown to reporters the debris of the previous missile attacks on Saudi territories from Yemen with the signs of the Iranian regime on it.
For the most recent missile attack Saudi Arabia put blame on the clerical regime of Iran. According to Saudi Arabia, the seven missiles were fired by the IRGC and agents of Lebanon’s Hezbollah. Meanwhile, the French foreign minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, said on Thursday that Iran was, in fact, sending weapons to the rebels in Yemen.
But more important than technical aspects, is the fact that the decision to fire these ground to ground missiles is more political and less an operational decision and it would not be possible for the Houthis to make the decision by themselves, and without the regime’s permission.
Considering the current conditions that the regime is under international pressure due to its missile program, it is hard to fathom what the Iran regimes achieve by the missile attack on Saudi Arabia.
The attack can be interpreted in two completely contradict way.
One is, the regime is determined to stand against international pressures and sends the message of power and resoluteness. On the other hand, there is a second interpretation that says this is a sign of retreat, and launching missiles is in fact preparation for the coming negotiations. The first interpretation does not need too much reasoning, but the second comment raises questions of the reasons and facts that it relies on.
Let’s imagine that the clerical regime really intends to retreat, it does not make sense if it blatantly takes the hands up and submits its missiles, and just on overnight stops its subversive role in the region. But tries to make a deal with and gain more for whatever loses. It is notable that the regime covered the same path whilst the talks were going on over the nuclear deal.
The statement of the Iran regime’s officials, from both rival factions, is remarkable.
Mohammad Javad Zarif, foreign minister from Hassan Rouhani’s faction, in a memo addressed to the Arab neighbors in Algerian network, very clearly has repeated the quest for negotiation with Saudi Arabia with an unusual sensation tone in diplomacy, saying, “Let’s look at each other eyes and make decision to solve our dissension at the negotiating table, not on the battleground. Honestly, we extend our hand towards our neighbors.”
Kamal Kharrazi, Khamenei’s advisor, has repeated the theme of the same word, calling for solving the problems of the region through negotiation, and said that the Islamic Republic is ready to cooperate with other countries, both bilaterally and multilaterally, in order to solve the problems of the region and create stability and security.
Emphasizing on the ‘talks’ by both factions of the regime means that this is the accepted strategic line of the whole of the regime.
Assuming this interpretation, the question arises why should missiles be complementary for the invitation to negotiation? How does it make sense?!
Yes, this is the main question. It should be considered that the clerical regime is acting on its own nature. This regime is ready to beg Saudi Arabia for a talk in gentle language. But for clarification, the demands of Saudi Arabia were, stopping interference in the internal affairs of the neighbors, ending support of the terrorists in Saudi Arabia and the countries of the region, and supplying weapons and missiles to the Houthi rebels in Yemen!
Accepting all the demands is beyond the tolerance of the Iranian regime, so the missiles were launched to carry the message for ‘talks’ again. The goal is intimidating Saudi Arabia, solving the problems with regional states, independently of the United States. Then the Mullahs have more chance to tackle with the Trump’s deadline from a stronger position.
But the regime is getting the wrong end of the stick. Prior to solving the problems with the neighbors in the region, the Iranian regime should solve its problems with the international community, particularly the President Tramp’s deadline.
Basically, there are not more than two options in front of the Iranian regime; either standing against the international demands over ‘Fixing’ the flaws of the nuclear deal and halting the missile programs, or a chain retreating of the all devastating foreign policies and warmongering.
The words of supporting both options fall from the lips of figures of rival factions inside the regime. Mainly the figures close to Khamenei believe in resistance against pressure, while others warn about the heavy price that the regime will pay for persistence on the status quo.
There are a tendency of counting on ‘the east’, Russia and China and taking advantages of the rift between the United States and Europe, which is not realistic.
Some analysts and experts from so-called reformist faction explicitly get to the points and admit that it is necessary to achieve agreement on the subjects of conflict with the world.
Ali Bigdeli, a regime’s experts, on March 26, pointed to the President Tramp’s deadline on the nuclear deal, and the emergence of radicals in Iran’s case which will bring the United States and Europe together on the imposing sanction on the Iranian regime. He also emphasizes on the need of making a final decision on the subjects of missile program, regional diplomacy, and human rights, stressing that it is just Khamenei who can decide on these topics.
But whether Khamenei does it or not is a matter of time.it is a real dilemma for him. As a matter of fact, no option saves Khamenei, for him and his brutal regime “All roads lead to the hell”.