Self-Defence And Acceptable Murder: Netanyahu Dreams Of Regime Change

These are the sorts of things that tend to be discussed in bunkered facilities and grimy locker rooms. Now, very much in the open and before the presses, the head of state of one country is openly advocating murdering another head of state before news outlets with little reaction. Lawbreaking has become chic, and Israel has taken the lead.

The pre-emptive, illegal strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure by Israel was not merely an attempt to arrest an alleged existential threat from yielding fruit (that weapons of mass destruction canard again); it was also a murderous exercise of institutional decapitation. Instead of receiving widespread condemnation in the halls of Washington, Brussels and other European capitals, there was cool nonchalance: Israel was within its right to limitlessly expand its idea of self-defence, a concept now so broad it has become a crime against peace.

We have seen how that self-defence so far operates. In Gaza, it functions on the level of starvation, the levelling of critical infrastructure, the killing of scores of civilians in each strike, the displacement of populations by the hundreds of thousands, the murdering of aid workers, and shooting those desperately in need of humanitarian aid as it is rationed by private security companies.

Regarding Iran, the flexible scope of Israeli self-defence includes the killing of a thick layer of military leaders, preferably while sleeping in the bosom of their families. Such figures include Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces; Hossein Salami, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC); Amir Ali Hajizadeh, head of the air force wing of the IRGC; Esmail Qaani, commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force; and Ali Shamkhani, an aide to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Of the scientists associated with Iran’s nuclear program, some 25 are on the assassination list, what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu libellously designated “Hitler’s nuclear team”. Thus far, the murders of 14 have been confirmed by sources cited in the Times of Israel. The Israeli Defense Forces have published some of their names, including nuclear engineering specialist Fereydoon Abbasi; physics expert Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi; chemical engineer Akbar Motalebi Zadeh; and nuclear physicist Ahmadreza Zolfaghari Daryani. Many of the figures are said by Israel to have been the intellectual progeny of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the touted father of the Iranian nuclear project.

Having killed the father in 2020, Israel has, with biblical brutality, sought to exterminate the brood and rob the cradle. With a mechanical formality bordering on the glacial, an IDF statement declared that, “The elimination of the scientists was made possible following in-depth intelligence research that intensified over the past year, as part of a classified and compartmentalized IDF plan.”

The attacks have broadened, suggesting a nationwide program of destabilisation. Oil and gas facilities have been struck, including the world’s biggest gas field, the South Pars. Not satisfied, Defence Minister Israel Katz promised to attack Iran’s media outlets, having an eye on Iranian state broadcaster IRIB: “The Iranian propaganda and incitement mouthpiece is on its way to disappear.” True to his word, the outlet was attacked even as TV anchor Sahar Emami was broadcasting, a crime captured in real time. In doing so, Israel replicates its own efforts in Gaza, which have seen the killing of 178 journalists since October 2023, the most lethal conflict ever recorded for media workers.

Netanyahu will not stop there. He smells the vapours of regime change and societal chaos, and, as his American counterparts did on eve of their illegally led invasion of Iraq in 2003, merrily feeds the notion that foreign interference can masquerade as liberation. “I believe the day of your liberation is near,” he haughtily proclaimed to Iran’s downtrodden subjects.

His most wishful target yet remains the religious leaders of the country. In an interview with ABC news, the Israeli PM was frank that killing Khamenei would not escalate the conflict so much as end it. He had been reluctantly dissuaded from doing so by US President Donald Trump, according to Reuters, Associated Press, Axios and Israel’s Channel 13. To Axios, a US official said that the administration had “communicated to the Israelis that President Trump is opposed to that. The Iranians haven’t killed an American, and discussion of killing political leaders should not be on the table.” Given Israel’s elastic stretching of self-defence, such restraint is likely to change.

Not wishing to be too modest, Netanyahu would have you think that he has done the world a moral service. “I’ll tell you what would have come if we hadn’t acted,” he boasted in a video message. “We had information that this unscrupulous regime was planning to give the nuclear weapons that they would develop to their terrorist proxies. That’s nuclear terrorism on steroids. That would threaten the entire world.”

These words are a chilling echo of the rationale used by the George W. Bush administration in attacking Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, ostensibly to disarm him of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) that had already been eliminated. (The US had, as cheer leaders and supporters, those other fine students of international law: the United Kingdom and Australia.) As part of Washington’s “Global War on Terror”, President Bush explained in his 2002 State of the Union address that North Korea, Iran and Iraq constituted an “axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world.” By seeking WMDs, such states “could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred.” Many justifications for using force in international relations, especially regarding the language of illegal war, are reruns of plagiarism.

For Netanyahu, killing Iranian leaders and the scientific intelligentsia was a salvaging antidote, a point he was trying to impress upon his US allies. “Our enemy is your enemy… We’re dealing with something that will threaten all of us sooner or later. Our victory will be your victory.” Forget international law and its contrivances, its disciplining protocols and hindering conventions. In its place, an unvarnished rogue state which, by any other name, would be as criminally dangerous.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

© Scoop Media