Iran - why no sauce for the gander?

 President Biden  has condemned  Iran’s attack on Israel “in the strongest possible terms.”  The British Prime Minister has described it as “reckless.”  Yet both these leaders, and their governments have, consistently over a period of six months, strenuously  insisted on Israel’s right to “defend itself “ (ie respond) to the Hamas attack on their citizens on 7^th  October.

 Surely “what is sauce for the goose [should be] sauce for the gander.”

Israel’s attack on the Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus, which killed two of Iran’s senior generals and several others, took place  on 1^st April.  Both the US and British governments seem to have been curiously silent on any “right” of Iran  to respond to this attack on what is technically their territory.

 I freely admit I have not read all the newspapers or heard every news bulletin, but t was not until yesterday 15^th April (that is, two weeks later) that I read any hint of criticism, when an article in the Guardian* claimed that “analysts [have] pointed out that Israel bulldozed through every red line to attack a location that Tehran maintains was tantamount to attacking Iranian soil.”

I write this not to indicate support for Iran’s action, or approval of its illiberal and fanatical government, but to point out that to be credible the West’s response to infractions of international law or common decency, or belligerent behaviour,  should be even-handed.

 I and most of my generation have been brought up to see the “political” West as the “Good Guys.”  The governments and citizens of the non-aligned nations, (and emerging “Great Powers” of which India and Brazil are good examples,) look at events from a different standpoint.

 For what it is worth I join with the West’s calls for restraint. 

 It is significant that, if we are to believe the reports, Iran has declared its attack on Israel as a success  (in spite of all the evidence that it was almost totally thwarted,) and is content to leave the matter there.  It is Netanyahu and his government who are threatening vengeance.

 At least, if I understand things correctly, neither the US nor the UK governments will provide  forces to any military retaliation.  Refusing to supply further arms would be a welcome next step.

 

Post Script: added 08h20, 18th April.  I've just listened to a lengthy interview with Grant Shaps, our Defence Secretary, on Radio 4.  Shaps was being pressed  as to why he and the US were urging "restraint" on Israel, rather than going all out for retaliation against Iran's attack.  No mention that Israel provoked the attack by bombing the Iranian  diplomatic compound in Damascus.

*Strategic Failure:  Peter Beaumont and Emma Graham-Harrison, 15^th April