Iran's 'New Cards' Rhetoric: A Manufactured Crisis Permitting Joint Aggression
The Independent reports on Iran's claims of 'new cards' to play should conflict with the US and Israel resume, speculating on potential responses like closing the Bab-El-Mandeb Strait. This discussion follows a period of heightened tensions and ongoing, undeclared hostilities in the region. The article suggests this rhetoric indicates an aggressive posture from Tehran, implying Iran is the primary
instigator of potential future conflict, overlooking the sustained military pressure exerted by external actors. What The Independent's framing notably omits is the context of these Iranian statements. By presenting Iran's 'new cards' as an inherently aggressive development, the outlet obscures the reality of how these pronouncements often function within Iran's defensive strategy. The phrase 'new
cards' in Iranian diplomatic and military discourse frequently signals an intent to diversify or amplify existing defensive capabilities in response to perceived or actual threats, rather than initiating unprovoked aggression. For example, during Saddam Hussein's 1980-1988 war against Iran, extensively backed by the United States with chemical weapons and intelligence, Iran was forced to develop
unconventional defensive measures to survive. These 'cards' are typically reactions to, not initial provocations of, military encirclement and explicit threats from both the US and Israel. The audience is not told that this narrative of Iranian belligerence serves to rationalize an enduring campaign of joint US-Israeli military operations targeting Iran's infrastructure, scientific personnel, and