After scientist's murder, Iran should opt for restraint
After the assassination of Iran's leading nuclear scientist, some in the country will be calling for retaliation. This would be dangerous for the region
The assassination last week of a top Iranian scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, is undoubtedly a blow to the malign mission in which he was accused of playing a central role: Tehran’s suspected nuclear weapons programme. But the fallout, if mismanaged, could be damaging to the region as a whole.
For Tehran's hardliners, looking like an ineffective victim is unconscionable
Iran has faced similar setbacks before. Four Iranian nuclear scientists were assassinated between 2010 and 2012. And last January, the head of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Qassem Suleimani, was killed in a US strike. While it remains unclear who is behind the killing, attacks like these fuel anxiety in Iran's government.
Despite threats of a severe response each time, however, Tehran’s immediate retribution tends to be more muted. The fact that there was no direct military response after the killing of Suleimani, whose death was far more significant and symbolic than Fakhrizadeh, is telling about the unlikelihood of such a response this time around.
There are important distinctions between the two men's profiles. Suleimani was a soldier who had ordered many assassinations. Fakhrizadeh’s killing was more surprising as he was not seen as an immeditate military target. Although Iran’s progress towards a nuclear weapon must not be allowed to continue apace, critics will question whether long-term safety and justice are served if extra-judicial killings become a staple of strategies to contain those ambitions.
Moreover, Fakhrizadeh’s assassination creates new risks. Iran has many violent proxy groups in the region. They endanger the lives of those living in countries in which Iranian influence is strong. Rising tensions could result in tragic missteps, like Iran's inadvertent downing of a Ukrainian airliner, killing all 176 passengers, in the tense atmosphere after Suleimani's assassination.
Iranian state media has said that Fakhirzadeh's body will be taken to various shrines throughout the country. AFP
There are political risks, too. Fakhrizadeh’s killing and the emotive internal response to it could empower those in Tehran advocating aggressive reactions. Perhaps this is what the assassins were relying on. Iran’s hard-line faction already has some momentum, as the country struggles under sanctions, Covid-19 and a plunging economy. Paranoia within the government could make Iran move its activities further underground, complicating future negotiations for a new nuclear deal to curb its weapons programme.
History shows us that an Iran under pressure can be particularly volatile. For Tehran’s hardliners, looking like an ineffective victim is unconscionable. In contrast, the real danger to Iran, its people and the wider Middle East, would be the reckless actions advocated by the fringe. Iran should view its current vulnerability as proof that it cannot justify its pariah status any longer.
In less than two months, Joe Biden will take his seat in the Oval Office and his administration will endeavour to find a more certain path by which Iran can come in from the cold. This can only happen, however, if Iran’s leaders can demonstrate restraint and level-headedness, and walk away from their destabilising activities within their borders and around the region.
Founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al Banna, "accepted the political utility of violence"
Views of key Muslim Brotherhood ideologue, Sayyid Qutb, have “consistently been understood” as permitting “the use of extreme violence in the pursuit of the perfect Islamic society” and “never been institutionally disowned” by the movement.
Muslim Brotherhood at all levels has repeatedly defended Hamas attacks against Israel, including the use of suicide bombers and the killing of civilians.
Laying out the report in the House of Commons, David Cameron told MPs: "The main findings of the review support the conclusion that membership of, association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism."
WWE Super ShowDown results
Seth Rollins beat Baron Corbin to retain his WWE Universal title
Finn Balor defeated Andrade to stay WWE Intercontinental Championship
Shane McMahon defeated Roman Reigns
Lars Sullivan won by disqualification against Lucha House Party
Randy Orton beats Triple H
Braun Strowman beats Bobby Lashley
Kofi Kingston wins against Dolph Zigggler to retain the WWE World Heavyweight Championship
Mansoor Al Shehail won the 50-man Battle Royal
The Undertaker beat Goldberg
Who has been sanctioned?
Daniella Weiss and Nachala Described as 'the grandmother of the settler movement', she has encouraged the expansion of settlements for decades. The 79 year old leads radical settler movement Nachala, whose aim is for Israel to annex Gaza and the occupied West Bank, where it helps settlers built outposts.
Harel Libi & Libi Construction and Infrastructure Libi has been involved in threatening and perpetuating acts of aggression and violence against Palestinians. His firm has provided logistical and financial support for the establishment of illegal outposts.
Zohar Sabah Runs a settler outpost named Zohar’s Farm and has previously faced charges of violence against Palestinians. He was indicted by Israel’s State Attorney’s Office in September for allegedly participating in a violent attack against Palestinians and activists in the West Bank village of Muarrajat.
Coco’s Farm and Neria’s Farm These are illegal outposts in the West Bank, which are at the vanguard of the settler movement. According to the UK, they are associated with people who have been involved in enabling, inciting, promoting or providing support for activities that amount to “serious abuse”.
