‘Iran sees itself in a moral fight, not a military fight’: Syed Akif Zaidi

The US has attacked three nuclear sites in Iran. As an Indian citizen who has lived in Iran for over 15 years, what is happening now in Iran?

We are going through historic times. This morning was an important turning point. The United States bombed three nuclear sites in Iran, one not far from where I live in Qom, near the Fordow site. This marks the first instance where declared nuclear powers—the USA and Israel—have attacked a non-nuclear state and NPT [non-proliferation treaty] signatory. We should add that the United States is the only country that has used nuclear weapons against civilian populations in August 1945, after Imperial Japan had already entered surrender negotiations.

There has been a conflict in West Asia for 45 years between two ideologies. On one hand, the American-led imperial axis with Israel as its important component. This axis has existed for 200 to 250 years, earlier led by European colonial powers, but since World War II, America leads this colonial imperial axis. Forty-five years ago, a challenge emerged when the Islamic Revolution occurred in 1979, leading to the formation of the Islamic Resistance Axis led by Iran.

Today is historic because the Western imperial axis has been forced into direct military confrontation with Iran for the first time. Until now, they pushed forward other elements—Saddam Hussein, ISIS, or recently Israel. But now the head of this axis has dropped all pretence.

Regarding life in Iran—this attack began on June 13, today is June 22. Life has carried on normally. This morning’s attack on Fordow and other locations—I don’t know anybody in Qom who heard the explosion. We learned from the news. While I was out this morning, life was normal. Shops open, traffic, everything running as usual.

Iran faces two nuclear powers. How will Iran fight back? The Americans and Israelis keep talking about regime change.

This conflict has begun to clarify the reality of the balance of power versus what exists in media bubbles. In any long-term conflict, odds are stacked against America and Israel. The USA hasn’t won a single military conflict since 1945—Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. Without exception, when military conflicts drag on beyond a couple of days, the US military machine has folded and been defeated.

When the Israeli attack began on June 13, on June 14—which was Eid al-Ghadir anyway—immediately following the attack, Tehran saw 3 million ordinary residents come out to celebrate this religious holiday. The Israeli attack was continuing on June 14. A couple of days ago we had Friday prayers—historic in Iran because I’ve attended many but never seen such a massive turnout. Men, women, children, old people. So much crowd and traffic that prayers ended with people still stuck trying to reach the location.

For two hours in 40-degree heat, those who made it to Friday prayers and the large number who couldn’t reach in time got together in a protest procession, calling out to America and Israel, challenging them to a much harder fight.

There are three emotions visible in the Iranian population. First, joy and happiness at having rained collectively more than a thousand missiles and drones on the Zionist entity. Second, amazing willingness to fight—we are on the right, we were wronged, we did nothing wrong, we were targeted illegitimately. That brings enormous desire to fight back. Third, immense sense of hope and confidence that victory is near because when somebody’s on the right, God will support them.

After American strikes, could they not come back with nuclear weapons against cities? What are the concerns?

The possibility of nuclear weapons use against civilian population by America is real—it’s the only country that’s done that. Their willingness isn’t in question. What’s holding them back is fear of consequences. Not public opinion protests—since October 7, 2023, they’ve decided they cannot afford to care about public opinion, especially on European and American streets.

What concerns them is that Iran and the Resistance Axis have been preparing for every scenario for decades, including nuclear weapons use by the USA. Iran is large. Missile production, storage and launch facilities are dispersed around the country. A large chunk are underground deep inside rocky mountains covering almost all of Iran. Iran has been strategically gaming for every possibility, including this horrifying one. It is this fear of consequence holding them back. But they may still miscalculate and pay a commensurate price.

Iran is not in need of military assistance from other forces, at least not at this point, because it has been preparing for this and much larger conflict for a long time.

To keep a long war going, you need supplies. Is there any support from China, Russia? The Iranian Foreign Minister is going to Moscow.

China, Russia, and Iran are on the same page challenging American and Western hegemony. They share common interest in a multipolar world emerging rapidly partly because of these three countries. Diplomatic support exists between them.

But I don’t see military support on the horizon. Russia condemned strikes and declared it will not pull technicians from the Bushehr nuclear energy plant, providing moral backing. But when [Russian President Vladimir] Putin was asked three days ago about getting into war with supplies and forces, he said we have no defence cooperation agreement with Iran. He added that some time ago we broached defence cooperation with them, and Iran didn’t show interest.

While diplomatic and moral support from China, Russia, and several other countries exists and will continue, I do not foresee any coming to Iran’s military aid in the foreseeable future.

What about the region? Iran is supposed to have taken losses. Hezbollah got badly hit after October 7. There has been regime change in Syria. How will this regional chess play out?

All countries in the region except Syria, which is not genuinely independent any more, have condemned Israeli and American aggression. These countries don’t wish to see war because they understand this war will end with American hegemony greatly diminished, if not entirely vanquished. These powers are largely dependent on American backing. Present rulers of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Gulf states cannot realistically expect to survive without Western backing.

They’re afraid because any war ends with Western hegemony greatly declined. But their Western backer, America, has been forced to choose war because it sees its hegemony diminishing anyway. So it’s a gamble America was forced to take by attacking Iran.

Militarily, Iran will fight alone for the foreseeable future and has been preparing for that. In terms of public support within Iran and the larger Muslim world, and even beyond, support and sympathy exists with Iran and will grow as this war carries on.

Pakistan has just nominated Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize. How do you see Pakistan’s role as a nuclear weapon state?

Pakistan, Turkey, or other countries at this point do not have a decisive role at this stage. All these countries openly express support for Iran and condemn attacks. But none wishes to see this war continue. More than diplomatic support or passing messages, I don’t see any playing a fundamental, decisive role. This is fundamentally a fight between Iran and America, with their respective networks of allies.

Do you think Iran will be patient or directly attack American presence in the region?

I believe there’s been an announcement that Ayatollah Khamenei will make his third public statement since the Israeli attack began, which will clear things up.

My estimation is that attacks on Israel will continue as a separate file associated with unprovoked Israeli aggression on June 13. A new file will open regarding retaliation against American interests. But I don’t see that happening suddenly and dramatically. Iran has never acted emotionally or suddenly.

I expect Iran will go through demanding a UN Security Council meeting, insisting they condemn this unprovoked attack. Since America won’t let that reach a conclusion, it will be placed on historical record that diplomatic effort was made. After that, it will begin in an escalatory, step-by-step fashion targeting American interests.

American interests are multiple—tens of thousands of American soldiers in countries seconds away when talking about hypersonic missile attacks. It’s literally seconds to get to those bases using missiles travelling at Mach 10 or higher. There’s the international oil economy, financial markets, and so forth. The range of options for Iran are immense, and it can go on picking and escalating for perhaps months to come.

Israeli intelligence seemed to have penetrated Iran in the first strike, taking out Revolutionary Guards leaders. Are there forces within Iran happy to see the regime challenged?

There is a network of Israeli and American intelligence agents within Iran. That network was able to play a role from June 13 to about June 16. Most attacks inside Iran were launched from within using small drones, car bombs or improvised explosive devices, causing minor damage.

This network has been damaged greatly over the last week. Hundreds of individuals, perhaps thousands, have been arrested. Many locations storing explosive material have been discovered. Today is the last day of general amnesty declared for anybody associated with this intelligence operation to turn themselves in.

There is no serious political force that wishes to overthrow the present government at this point.

Are there any internal challenges you foresee? Iran does oppress minorities, women, and dissent is crushed.

When there is external aggression, people rally around the flag. Iran is no exception—if anything, it’s exceptional in the high degree of unity created. People who are not particularly warm towards the Islamic establishment have strong nationalist feelings. They understand it needs to be supported to defend this country and retaliate against unprovoked aggression. The level of unity is enormously high.

This is a good example of how Iran is consistently misread by its enemies and others. When Israel began attack on June 13 or the American attack this morning, these were not devastating military attacks. They were shocking because [they were] unprovoked and unexpected, but on June 13, less than 100 people were killed in all of Iran with 90 million population. Perhaps three or four civilian infrastructure were affected. In a large country like Iran, these numbers don’t add up to anything. About eight senior commanders were killed—a loss, but cannot break the back of armed forces.

Why was this attack carried out when it cannot objectively be called devastating? Because there was a miscalculation and misreading. The misreading was that this attack would create shock and awe in the Iranian public, leading to disappointment with the ruling establishment. The public would blame them, saying, “You never solved our economic problems, but told us you kept us safe, but you’re not even able to keep us safe any more.”

This was the plan. Even this morning’s attack on three nuclear sites—it’s unprovoked, must be condemned, there will be retaliation. But this doesn’t break the back of the nuclear industry or nuclear science community, where there are thousands of researchers, scientists, institutions. By targeting three sites, what are you going to do? These will be rebuilt or better sites built. Dropping bombs cannot eradicate technology or science that exists in a country.

The attempt is to send a message to Iranian people that “we can do whatever we want, so don’t try to fight us.” This is misreading because every threatening statement or action by Israel and America has had no consequence other than increase in patriotic, nationalist, religious fervour to fight.

Why do people use the word “regime” when describing Iran’s ruling establishment, but won’t use it for the murderous American system or Israeli genocidal machine? Multiple factors cause this misreading, even by decent people. One is a simple lack of information. People don’t know Iran has its own world of books, theory, movies, music, poetry—a whole civilisation people are unaware of.

There is misinformation—an enormous propaganda machine exists globally to spread misinformation about Iran. Third, we cannot disregard the role of stereotypes that decent people have absorbed. We’ve been taught that religion and government relationship is bad without exception. We’ve been taught that Mullahs rule Iran—this stereotype of the Islamic evil person controlling simple-minded Muslim masses.

In the context of the present attack, there’s this iconic episode—the attack on central state television in Tehran two days ago. There were intelligence reports that this building would be attacked. Small-scale attacks had begun, but staff chose to stay on to continue reporting. There’s this lady, Sahar Imami, the television news presenter. She was live on television, attacks happening, she could hear sounds, then a direct attack on her studio caused her to leave her seat. But a few moments later, she was back on air live.

For Iranians and their understanding of what freedom is, what an ideal woman should be, she represents for many what an ideal woman is—somebody modestly dressed but very fearless, with clarity about goals and willing to risk death for higher ideals. This is their understanding of what freedom means.

What happens to Palestinians when this becomes a pitch battle between nuclear states? What about October 7, which began this spiral?

What’s happening in Gaza and attacks on Iran are intimately connected—different chapters of a larger story. These may appear to be conflicts between countries, but fundamentally these are conflicts between two fronts. The old colonial front led by America with Israel as critical outpost in West Asia. The newer challenger front beginning 45 years ago—the Islamic resistance front led by Iran.

The Palestinian cause has changed from being a nationalist Palestinian cause facing Jewish nationalism, acquiring Islamic character. That’s why it’s now led by Islamist organisations like Hamas and other resistance groups, which are part of the Islamic Resistance Axis led by Iran. These are interconnected conflicts. Whatever is the outcome of any one has consequences for all other battlefronts.

Recently we had America submitting to the Yemenis, signing a ceasefire agreement without mentioning Israel. This was a great victory for Yemenis when the American military machine decided to withdraw from Yemen, but it emboldened all other elements of the Islamic Resistance Axis. Same with what happened in Syria—a setback when Israelis with the Turks were able to overthrow the government and put their puppet in place.

As this war moves toward a climax, the outcome in Palestine, in Gaza particularly, will be greatly affected by whatever happens.

How does faith play out in this fighting? Muharram is beginning soon and Iran is a religious society.

The Islamic Resistance Axis is fundamentally faith-based. Iran leading it with components like Hezbollah, Yemenis—they’re bound together by faith in their righteousness and belief that if they serve humanity’s cause, God will assist them at the most difficult times. Unless we understand this, it’s difficult to comprehend, but this is fundamentally a faith-based movement centred in Iran with allies across the region.

The belief is that if we are righteous and do the right thing—choosing not to make nuclear weapons despite threats from America and Israel for decades because religiously and morally it’s wrong—we will still win because we have the greatest power backing us, which is God.

Muharram, related to the epic battle of Karbala of Imam Hussein choosing death over submission, is the central theme running through Iranian society all year. It’s highlighted in the holy month beginning in five days. As this war stretches forward, Iranian and Muslim morale will rise continuously, both because of war and because of additional role that Muharram mourning ceremonies will create.

India has civilisational links with Iran. What about India-Iran relations now?

If we look at India and Iran as civilisational states, there’s so much in common. Both went through imperial experience and fought against imperialism—India achieving independence in 1947 from direct imperialism, Iran in 1979 from indirect imperialism.

But these civilisational links haven’t prevented distance emerging between ruling establishments, particularly over the last 10 years. The gaps began as India underwent political and economic reorientation with liberalisation in 1991. India chose to weaken its non-aligned position and move closer to America and consequently Israel.

Awkwardness has developed at the government level—neither country sees open confrontation in its interest, but the warmth that existed earlier doesn’t exist any more. As India moved closer to America and Israel, Iran feels India has taken Iran and the Resistance Axis for granted, believing we can do whatever we want but Iran will have no choice but to be nice and sell oil to us.

This assumption has driven Indian policy and has been noticed in Iranian strategic circles. As this war continues, India will find itself in an increasingly challenging strategic spot as regimes and institutions it cultivated relationships with over two decades rapidly lose influence in the Muslim world and West Asia, while those parts sidelined or ignored by India rapidly rise to greater prominence.

Do you think the Strait of Hormuz will be closed? Will oil prices go through the roof?

I’m not in a position to predict timing. Iran has an enormous menu of retaliatory options and has gamed well in advance how it will run down and check off items one after the other. Closing the Strait of Hormuz is definitely on that menu—Iran has declared that repeatedly. But will that be day one, day 10, or day 100? Perhaps tonight, perhaps not for next year.

Fundamentally being a civilisational and faith-based political movement, Iran’s horizon and goals aren’t limited to securing national interests. Iran sees itself as the vanguard of a bright new age for all humanity. It may take decades or longer, but it sees that as its civilisational mission. Its present area of focus is West Asia, where by ejection of American and Western hegemony and collapse of the artificial state of Israel, a great milestone will be achieved in this global quest for greater justice, brotherhood, and humanity.

Iran is careful about never being labelled as an aggressor. It waits and waits till it is attacked openly and brutally till it retaliates. It chooses not to make a nuclear bomb despite the fact that the whole world will justify it. It will retaliate but not by lashing out at anyone and everyone, because it understands it has to build itself up to play a leadership and civilisational role in the longer term that goes much beyond your lifetime and my lifetime.

Is there not regret that Iran does not have nuclear weapons?

My reading is Iran will not go the nuclear route, no matter what happens. Iran has demonstrated that the proposition “if you want to stay safe and have deterrence, you need to go nuclear” is wrong. Iran has demonstrated it has deterrence even without going nuclear. The attack this morning or June 13 were not large-scale, devastating military attacks—they have more performative usage, inclined toward encouraging the Iranian public to feel disappointed rather than actually causing devastation.

Iran has demonstrated over 45 years that, without nuclear weapons, deterrence against nuclear powers can be achieved. It has also demonstrated that you can be a nuclear power like Israel, supported by three other nuclear powers—the UK, the US, France—but a non-nuclear power like Iran can rain almost 2,000 missiles and drones on you. You do not have deterrence despite going nuclear. Same with Russia—a formidable nuclear power but finds itself harassed at every step.

Iran has, through experience and observing others, come to the conclusion that in cost-benefit analysis terms, it doesn’t make sense to go nuclear. More importantly, Iran sees itself in a moral fight, not a military fight. Because it sees its fight as fundamentally moral and civilisational, not about grabbing resources, it understands that if it achieves a military victory with moral superiority by not having nuclear weapons, it will set itself up for much greater civilisational victory in decades to follow. Despite whatever happens, Iran will stay within the NPT and not choose to create a nuclear weapon.