We have not seen Western capitals as riled up and angry about Iranian drones as we have lately. There is often talk of sanctions, retaliation, and diplomatic steps as part of the West's handling of Iranian drones, which play an influential role in the ongoing military conflict inside Ukraine.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Iranian drones are not a new dossier for Western leaders, but they have played dangerous roles that have affected Western strategic interests in the Middle East, as their targets were Saudi and Emirati facilities.
Used in several attacks in Iraq, a drone arsenal belonging to the Lebanese Hezbollah threatens the security and stability of Israel, to which Western capitals never fail to reiterate their support against any threat. The West only resented these drones when they interfered with the war in Ukraine.
We are not talking about the legality of this use or not, we are not considering the legal or even humanitarian aspects of the course of the conflict, nor are we considering the West's claims about the presence of these drones on the battlefields, nor the reliability of Iran's repeated official denials about it.
But we are simply discussing the idea of an eye that sees only what it wants when it wants. In a sense, the West's dilemma with these drones only began when they entered the line of the Ukrainian crisis to affect its direct interests, in a way that alters the balance of power and jeopardizes the tens of billions of dollars pumped in by Western countries to support Ukraine since the crisis began.
Just recently, Britain joined France in accusing Iran of violating the terms of the nuclear deal by supplying Russia with armed drones in violation of Iran's obligations under the nuclear deal. It is as if supplying the Houthi militia with the same planes used to attack oil facilities in Saudi Arabia and the UAE was not so.
As if having these drones with Lebanese Hezbollah and Iraqi militias is not a violation of those commitments. Wasn't it a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, unanimously adopted on July 20, 2015, which endorsed the Joint Plan of Action (JCPOA)?
The vow by Western capitals to act collectively to hold Iran accountable for these violations and its "destabilizing behavior around the world" came only after the Iranian threat made contact with direct Western interests, although the security of oil facilities in the Gulf region and the security of other allies is part of these vital interests, which are supposedly no less important than the issue of supporting Ukraine from the perspective of the West.
But fear for the fate of negotiations to revive the nuclear deal at the time seemed to outweigh the importance of these interests. Things are different now. The deal is in a coma, while it is the fate of billions of dollars of direct military support to Ukraine that Iranian drones are threatening.
The strategic landscape is now both more ambiguous and more dangerous. The West no longer cares about accelerating the pace of uranium enrichment, in full swing.
It will accelerate as the Iranian regime senses signs of a possible confrontation, whether over the failure of the nuclear agreement or over escalating tensions between Russia and the West in Ukraine, and the possibility of Iran getting involved if the conflict widens, calling for a nuclear deterrent to protect the regime should it become a military target as a Russian ally.
Talk of the seriousness of Iran's nuclear threat has fizzled out for a few weeks, until after the midterm elections – for months or forever. But the bottom line is that events offer new evidence that the US is not a responsible enough partner and classifies its allies by degrees and levels when necessary. This is self-evident and understandable in the world of politics.
But it is crucial that Washington not require others to sacrifice for it, even if it requires the loss of enormous economic and commercial interests, as is the case with oil production. The West's vehement stance on Iranian drones adds further evidence of the West's duplicity in dealing with its Gulf allies.
The drones spreading chaos and unrest in the Middle East did not emerge in the context of any Western discourse. But now they have become the target of all diplomatic rhetoric and moves once they intervened to affect the West's direct interests in Ukraine.
It is right here that the West must learn the lesson that explains the decline of its status and the loss of its friends in the Gulf and the Middle East. This is not a matter of "schadenfreude" about the West.
There is no time for such absurdity, but we are reminded that sources of threat and danger must be treated with the same yardstick, because danger that violates laws and agreements and targets a partner we can see today will not exclude anyone in the future. This is what we always say. Narrow–mindedness in assessing the implications of Iranian threats puts many in a difficult position.
The Iranian regime does not believe in the rules of the traditional political game. Rather, it believes in force in achieving its goals. What could be wrung out by negotiation yesterday and today may be hard to recover tomorrow.
This is how the regime's ambitions are raised, reflecting not only on its relations with the West, but also on the security and stability of our region and Tehran's relations with its regional environment.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
