Latest news with #Irib
Malaysiakini
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Malaysiakini
What the Iran-Israel escalation really revealed
LETTER | From the outside, the latest Iran–Israel escalation looked like a tightly controlled spectacle, one more episode in the long tradition of geopolitical theatre. Symbolic strikes. Calibrated optics. Narratives exchanged more than missiles. However, something disrupted the performance. Someone, somewhere inside Iran, broke the script. All signs point to the conflict being originally designed as a limited, performative escalation, meant to simulate confrontation while avoiding real strategic consequences. Israel's opening salvo was telling: a high-visibility strike on Iran's state broadcaster (Irib), carried out during a live news segment but without catastrophic loss of life. A communication centre, yes, but also a deeply symbolic, civilian-facing target. Iran's initial response also bore the hallmarks of restraint. The state narrative emphasised successful interception, dismissed damage as minimal, and sought to contain the emotional temperature. There was no immediate mobilisation. No red-line rhetoric. No retaliatory frenzy. On both sides, a choreography of ambiguity seemed to be in play. One cannot help but recall the February 2025 skirmish between India and Pakistan - another flashpoint marked by cries of 'nuclear escalation', which briefly dominated headlines, diverted attention from Ukraine, then dissolved quietly. Iran retaliates The Israel - Iran episode seemed to follow a similar script: controlled, symbolic, narratively contained. But this time, something went off-script. Instead of a symbolic missile volley and a return to messaging, Iran escalated. Precisely. Deliberately. Repeatedly. Multiple waves of drones and missiles penetrated Israel's multi-layered defence system. Strategic infrastructure was hit. Regional allies, like the Houthis, entered the fray. The US ambassador in Tel Aviv reportedly had to seek shelter five times in a single night - a detail that says less about the danger than it does about the surprise. If the strikes were meant to be symbolic, someone forgot to send the memo. The missiles kept coming. Iranian officials later clarified: they were using only older missile stockpiles. In other words, this wasn't even their real answer. It was a demonstration of capacity, not desperation. If the original script called for symbolic retaliation, this wasn't it. This shift suggests something profound: that the escalation was not fully controlled from the top, or at least not uniformly. Within Iran's complex power structure, factions exist that vary in loyalty, alignment, and ideology. Some lean toward diplomatic preservation. Others are fiercely nationalistic. Still others are, quietly, compromised. It is entirely plausible that the original limited response was shaped by internal actors influenced, directly or structurally, by foreign interlocutors. Agreements may have been made. Visibility exchanged for restraint. Missile arcs are calculated for narrative rather than damage. But it seems that within Iran's strategic apparatus, a patriot faction intercepted the script. Whether it was the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), a missile command directorate, or a leadership cell with a longer memory and shorter patience that chose to halt the performance. To let Israel strike symbolic targets unchallenged would have been to accept ritual humiliation. Instead, they answered with precision, message, and method. Real deterrence, not managed optics, became the reply. No appetite for nukes For decades, Iranian leaders has been assassinated, sanctioned, bombed, and blamed, often with little or no international recourse. Its alleged nuclear weaponisation programme has been banned internally by fatwa, repeatedly affirmed in official United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) submissions and embedded in domestic law. In a revealing turn, a senior Iranian official recently called for the fatwa to be revoked only to be swiftly overruled by the top command. Although largely ignored in the West, the episode is telling. You do not attempt to revoke what does not exist. Still, Israel, backed by Western powers, continues to invoke the so-called Iranian nuclear threat as a pretext for assassinations, sabotage, and strikes. Scientists have been assassinated, nuclear infrastructure bombed, and broader infrastructure damaged through cyberattacks, and the West calls it self-defence. Obviously, when such aggression is met only with narrative containment, credibility dies. Internally and externally. Iran's patriotic factions may have concluded that survival now requires reimposing real fear into deterrence - not just words, but capabilities demonstrated under fire. And that is exactly what they did. The escalation has now created a paradox. Those who designed the conflict to be seen but not felt - whether in Tel Aviv, Washington, or even segments of Tehran - now find themselves cornered by consequences they never intended. Israel's might challenged Israel, long buffered by US-backed impunity, has now absorbed real strategic damage. Its famed Iron Dome has revealed critical gaps. Key infrastructure has been shaken. Even its domestic media, typically used to project victimhood to international audiences, has gone curiously quiet. Meanwhile, the Western narrative, still stuck in Cold War templates, tries to reassert control: nuclear threat, rogue state, axis of evil. But the public is growing resistant. Especially when Iran has shown, again and again, a legal, religious, and strategic rejection of nuclear arms, while operating with more restraint than its adversaries. Much like with Ukraine, the US administration has tried to walk both sides of the line, claiming non-involvement while orchestrating logistics. Refuelling Israeli jets, sharing satellite intel, and shooting down Iranian drones. But just as in Kyiv, control is slipping. Behind the scenes, indirect talks between the US and Iran have already collapsed - not over uranium levels or inspection terms, but over a deeper structural fault line. Tehran rightfully demanded that any talks be on equal grounds and that any agreement remain binding across US administrations. But Washington, fractured by partisanship and strategic inconsistency, simply cannot guarantee continuity. The collapse revealed a deeper asymmetry: Iran acts with institutional memory and policy coherence, while the US lurches between administrations and abandons commitments. This wasn't a technical failure. It was systemic. And Iran refuses to anchor its future to a partner built on shifting ground. US President Donald Trump, now in open conflict with the military-industrial establishment, has attempted to disentangle the US from these open-ended entanglements. But he is boxed in. The war machine continues with or without presidential blessing. And Israel is its most entrenched proxy. US President Donald Trump Ironically, Israel's collapse may have been triggered not by its enemies but by the very system that built it (refer to 'Zionism at the Edge: The Terminal Overreach of a Fading Project'). What this moment reveals is not just a rift between Iran and Israel but a schism within narrative power itself. M'sia asserting its stand Malaysia has positioned itself not on the battlefield but in the domain of narrative sovereignty. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has voiced strong support for Iran, not through military alignment, but through moral and political solidarity. In truth, Iran does not need boots on the ground. It has already demonstrated its military precision. What it needs now are narrative allies - states like Malaysia that are willing to challenge Western propaganda and defend the principles of lawful multipolarity. In today's conflict, the real front line is discursive, not kinetic and Malaysia is holding it. A war that was meant to be managed became real because someone inside refused to betray their country's dignity for another photo op. In doing so, they exposed: the weakness of Israeli defences, the limits of US orchestration, the fragility of Western narrative monopoly. And perhaps most importantly, they reminded the world that true deterrence is not choreographed. It is earned in silence, in precision, and in refusal to be cast in someone else's script. Dr Rais Hussin is the Founder of EMIR Research, a think tank focused on strategic policy recommendations based on rigorous research. The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
The Independent
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Israel strikes Iranian state TV studio mid-broadcast after telling up to 330,000 Tehran residents to evacuate
Hundreds of thousands of people in Tehran were warned by Israel to evacuate on Monday as it launched fresh strikes on Iran, including one that hit the country's state TV station during a live broadcast. Four days after Israel launched the largest attack on Iran since the 1980s, in a bid to eradicate Tehran's nuclear programme, the two foes continued to trade missile fire – with civilian casualties continuing to mount in the unprecedented conflict. Live footage showed anchor Sahar Emami briefly fleeing the studio as the offices of Iranian state broadcaster Irib were attacked, rocking the building and causing visible debris to fall in front of the camera. Clips published from across the street showed several fires burning in the building and a large plume of smoke billowing into the sky. Just prior to the attack, Israel's defence minister Israel Katz had said that 'the Iranian propaganda and incitement mouthpiece is on its way to disappearing', after Israel's military issued an evacuation notice covering much of Tehran's District 3. According to the Associated Press, the warning affected up to 330,000 people in a part of central Tehran housing Iran's state TV and police headquarters, international embassies, and three large hospitals, including one owned by Iran's Revolutionary Guard. With concerns over the conflict set to dominate the agenda at the G7 summit in Canada, Israel's allies were expected to urge de-escalation. But reports, citing US officials, suggested Donald Trump intended not to sign a G7 document, the draft of which reportedly called for both Iran and Israel to protect civilians and urged commitments to peace. From the outset of its fourth day, the conflict showed no signs of slowing. Iranian missiles struck Tel Aviv and the port city of Haifa shortly before dawn on Monday, killing at least eight people and wounding more than 100 others. Homes were destroyed close to the US embassy, which officials said suffered minor damage. While Iran claimed to have employed a new method allowing its projectiles to better evade Israel's air defences, Israel insisted that just seven out of fewer than 100 missiles fired by Iran overnight had landed in its territory. Following the attack on Iran's state broadcaster and an alleged attack on Farabi Hospital in the city of Kermanshah, Iranian state media claimed that Tehran was preparing for the 'largest and most intense missile attack' in history on Israeli soil. So far, at least 224 people have been killed in Iran, while 24 people have been killed in Israel and more than 500 injured, officials said, although rights groups warned the death toll in Iran was likely far higher. Germany announced it would start evacuating its citizens from Israel via Jordan, with a charter flight planned for Wednesday. Sir Keir Starmer said UK citizens should 'register their presence' on a portal which was due to be launched. Israel's president Isaac Herzog doubled down on Monday over claims that his country had 'no other choice' but to attack Iran because it was proceeding 'dramatically' towards building a nuclear bomb, telling Sky News: 'We have to remove the Iranian nuclear programme because we see the negotiating process as being futile because they are lying whilst talking to us.' While sources told Reuters that US intelligence continued to indicate that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon, Israel's attack came days after the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency accused Iran of breaching its non-proliferation obligations and warned that Tehran had enough uranium enriched to near-weapons grade to make nine nuclear bombs. Having declared on Monday that Israel had achieved air superiority above Tehran, the country's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, told Israeli troops at an air base that Israel was on its way to achieving its two main aims – wiping out Iran's nuclear programme and destroying its missiles. 'We are on the path to victory,' he said. 'We are telling the citizens of Tehran 'evacuate' and we are taking action.' Sources told Reuters that Tehran had asked Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Oman to press Mr Trump to use his influence on Israel to agree to an immediate ceasefire. In return, Iran would show flexibility in nuclear negotiations, it was claimed. Echoing these claims, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi, said on social media: 'If President Trump is genuine about diplomacy and interested in stopping this war, next steps are consequential. 'Israel must halt its aggression, and absent a total cessation of military aggression against us, our responses will continue. It takes one phone call from Washington to muzzle someone like Netanyahu. That may pave the way for a return to diplomacy.' Speaking to reporters at the G7 meeting, Mr Trump said: 'I'd say Iran is not winning this war, and they should talk, and they should talk immediately before it's too late.'
