When will the Israeli-Iranian war of retaliation end?

This phrase was often used in my youth, when an international issue was to be discussed. Like what? Just like "keen lem yekûn", "as if it does not exist, as if it does not exist". In its simplest form, "Mukabele-yi bi'l misl" means to retaliate with retaliation, to return the same treatment to its owner, to treat that person in the same way. In fact, it is an important course of action in both individual and social behaviour. In terms of individual relationships, it means responding in kind, that is, responding to the slap with a slap. "Mukabele-yi bi'l misl" is one of the meaningful and beautiful terms that should not be forgotten, which means "proportional use of force", just as we have become accustomed to the phenomenon of "disproportionate force", which has been mentioned a lot in recent years. In the international arena, it means to respond to any action or treatment encountered as a state to the same extent. As a legal term, retaliation means that a state responds in the same way to actions taken against it by another state that do not violate international law but damage its interests. "Mukabele-yi bi'l misl" as a concept in classical Islamic legal literature has had a wide scope and usage not only in inter-state relations but also in private law and other branches of public law. The roots of "Mukābala bi'l-misl" go back to ancient times. The Hammurabi Code (Art. 196-200) contains regulations on this subject, and inscriptions show that the ancient Greeks and Arabs also knew "mukābele bi'l-misl". This practice was also included in the Sharia of the Prophet Moses and later in the Qur'an (1) In the activities of peacetime on a legal basis, this situation generally manifests itself in three ways:

1- A state's resorting to an unlawful treatment against a previous violation of rights. The Andrew Brunson crisis, which caused the most tense days in the history of US-Turkey relations and brought the two countries to the point of imposing mutual sanctions, unfortunately caused Turkey to take a step back with the release of the US Evangelical priest.

2- When a state responds to an action that violates its own interests in a similar manner when there is no violation of the law. This perspective is frequently used at the starting point of Turkey's cross-border operations. Since both Syria and Iraq are unable to effectively establish both physical security and safety measures within their borders, cross-border operations are carried out by the Turkish Armed Forces in accordance with the famous Article 51 of the United Nations (UN) Charter. In order to eliminate terrorist attacks against our people and security forces from the north of Iraq and Syria by neutralising PeKaKa/KCK/KCK/YPG and other terrorist elements, to ensure border security and to eliminate terrorism at its source; In line with our rights of self-defence arising from Article 51 of the UN Charter, operations such as Claw-Sword and Claw-Lock operations have been and are being carried out in the north of Iraq and Syria, which are used by terrorists as bases for attacks on our country, and will be carried out in the future when the same conditions are not provided by Syria and Iraq.

3- It is when a state applies the same treatment to the citizens of another state as that state applies to its own citizens. As it will be remembered, in the recent visa problem with the USA, this situation has been realised by the USA in response to Turkey's decision to suspend visa applications. However, the effectiveness of this situation is questionable.

If you are a strong state, you will retaliate

The late Prof. Dr. Seha Meray always used this simple expression when talking about strength in international relations: "If you are a strong state, you will respond in kind". In other words, he used to say this expression much more excellently, dear readers, and this is the truth. What does this mean? It does not mean to retaliate with the same, but to retaliate in kind. This is a reflection and an important parameter of being strong. This statement of his is a direct expression of the practice of "Armed Mukābele bi'l-misl (retorsion, retortion) in peacetime, which is often confused today. (1) Retaliation is completely different from this both in terms of the nature of the practice and the violation of the rule of law, and it is not based on the use of armed force and thus on the violation of law.

Dear readers, why am I endeavouring to set out all this in such detail? After all these years, based on my experiences, I am saying this because it is one of the most important distinguishing features of surviving as a state or non-state actor, especially in the Middle East, and of being able to hold an influential piece of paper in one's hand. If events have opened a period of escalation or escalation in peacetime as "Armed Retaliation-yi bi'l misl", what must be done is to "Retaliate with Retaliation".

"Retaliation" decisions are extremely important in International Relations. Let's put the matter in its entirety from the very beginning, almost all relations are based on the principle of "reciprocity". In the purest sense, it means that a state responds to the decisions and actions of another state with a reciprocal response. This is the prerequisite for being a favourable state. As it is known, international relations are a set of uninterrupted activities that never stop. This does not include the avoidance of any action, including during periods of tension, but the retaliation against any action taken.

The reason why I bring all this up is that as a theo-political phenomenon, Israel, which is waiting for the Messiah, is a phenomenon of resonant operation "Armed Response-yi bi'l misl" against Iran, which is waiting for the Mahdi. It is Israel's targeting of the Iranian Embassy compound in Damascus as if it were an April Fools' joke. It is well known that Prime Minister Netanyahu needs to attack a location considered Iranian soil as much as air and water. The killing of three generals of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, including Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahidi, one of the senior commanders of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and four senior officers of the Iranian Armed Forces in their own diplomatic mission in Damascus in the Israeli airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Syria is, needless to say, a direct cause of war on the international arena. This is why the Supreme Guide (Supreme Leader) Ayatollah Khamenei, in his Friday sermon before the attack with a sniper rifle, said that Israel would be "punished" and "regret this crime", while President Ibrahim Reisi said that the attack "will not go unanswered". Until the evening of 13 April, the US intelligence agencies, which warned that Iran would attack Israel, tried to draw Israel's attention to the attack, just like the Russian intervention in Ukraine.

Indeed, the expected happened and Iran attacked the Israeli mainland with dozens of drones and ballistic missiles on the night of 13/14 April 2024. Although it was announced that 99% of Iran's activity was prevented in this attack, it was understood that the US and the UK assisted Israel's Iron Dome air defence system with air interceptors from the Ağratur and Dikelya bases in Cyprus and drones sent by military bases/points in the region. Iran used mostly kamikaze drone systems and cruise missiles in this attack. First, 170 kamikaze drones were launched from Iranian territory, travelling at a speed of 180 km per hour, and although it took more than six to seven hours for these drones to reach Israel, considering that the distance between Iran and Israel is 1500 km (2), Israel only waited and hesitated to respond flexibly against Iran. Iran, on the other hand, considered Iran's short-lived attack of "Armed Retaliation-yi bi'l misl", which was thought to have been "a stone thrown was not worth the frog it scared!", to be sufficient. Did the Iranian attack provide a unique opportunity for Netanyahu to keep his seat and consolidate domestic public opinion? Undoubtedly, yes. But the immorality of the Zionist occupiers, who brutally murdered more than 33,000 Gazans, including children, has reached such a peak that they even called for an emergency meeting of the UNSC by immediately wearing the armour of victimhood.

While all this was going on, especially the statement made by the Atomic Energy Authority attracted attention in the world public opinion, and it was especially and strongly requested that the attacks to be made should not be made on the nuclear facilities of both sides. Undoubtedly, in this situation, Israel's attacks targeting both Iraq and Iran were reminded. The first of these is "Operation Opera". In 1981, the Israeli Air Force carried out an air strike to destroy Iraq's Osirak nuclear test reactor. After this attack, the Osirak reactor was completely destroyed. Again, it should be noted that France, the Great Meddler, was in the leading role here, and that Iraq's energy and military relations with France in the 1970s had been transferred to military fields. The second was the 11 April 2021 attack directly on Iran, targeting the Natanz nuclear facility. Iran was carrying out uranium enrichment activities at this facility, as recorded by the Atomic Energy Authority. It may be recalled that the Iranian Foreign Minister at the time, Mohammad Javad Zarif, said that the attack on the underground Natanz nuclear facility would be avenged and directly accused Israel of what he called "sabotage". The facility was first reported to have suffered a power outage, and then Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran, called on the international community to take action, calling it an "act of nuclear terrorism". US intelligence sources also told the New York Times that a massive explosion had completely destroyed the system that powered the centrifuges inside the underground facility.

Three years and a week later, on 19 April 2024, at 03.30 on 19 April 2024, there was indeed a drone attack on the 8th Main Jet Base, which houses nuclear facilities near the central Iranian city of Isfahan. Both attacks reinforced the findings that both were cyber-attacks organised by the Mossad from inside Iran rather than from the Israeli mainland.

What is the Flexible Response Doctrine?

However, what needs to be done is to put the "Flexible Response" doctrine into action. As it is known, the US defence strategy for Europe and Israel during the Cold War until 1957 was carried out within the scope of the "Massive Response" doctrine. The doctrine was based on the destruction of all Soviet and Chinese mass centres with nuclear weapons in response to a Soviet attack. In the J.F. Kennedy era of the USA, this doctrine evolved into another doctrine. More precisely, a defence strategy of "Flexible Response" was adopted, which was developed with the logic that "whatever weapons the USSR attacks us with, we will attack them with the same weapons". Within the scope of the Truman doctrine, the USA, which got closer to the countries that were geographically close to the Soviets through the Marshall Plan, pursued a "containment policy" against the Warsaw Pact countries by establishing NATO, CENTO and SEATO, in which these states were also included. Within the scope of this doctrine, nuclear warheads were installed in NATO and CENTO countries, enabling them to strike the USSR directly. With the Flexible Response strategy, which replaced the Mass Response strategy, it was accepted that any attack on friendly countries, regardless of the weapon used, would be met with nuclear weapons by the USA.

However, what is taking place between Israel and Iran during the escalation is nothing more than an exchange of resonant attacks. It is far removed from NATO's flexible response system, and fortunately so. This, dear readers, is a clear proof that the US is moving away from its position as a mega power.

Footnotes

(1) Encyclopedia of Islam MUKĀBELE bi'l-MISL, مقابلة بالمثل ; https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/mukabele-bil-misl/ Accessed 21 April 2023/

(2) Yusuf Alabarda, "Lessons Learned from Iran's Attack on Israel", World of Turkey, 16 April 2024 ; https://www.worldofturkiye.com/author/yusufalabarda/yusuf-alabarda-16-nisan-2024-iranin-israile-saldirisindan-alinan-dersler/ Access Date 21 April 2023/