‘Dead cat diplomacy’ against Iran total failure

In 1991, the time Israel could still present itself as the victim, in 2024, however, the growing awareness regarding Israel’s true apartheid colors and the West’s hypocritical approach to human rights, make it unlikely that the appearance of new dead cats at Iran’s or Hamas’ doorsteps would turn them into the culprits.

The term “dead cat diplomacy” was first coined by former US Secretary of State James Baker, who was struggling to persuade disillusioned Arab leaders to attend the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference with Israel.

The Madrid Conference, despite not producing any treaties at the time, became the stepping stone for Washington to importune regional countries to let their guards down against Israel. It laid the groundwork for the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty in 1994 and even the Abraham Accords, according to which the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan normalized ties with Israel in 2020.

Arab leaders’ hesitancy to engage in talks with Israel following the regime’s blatant disregard of its commitments under the Geneva Conference of 1973, had become a real drain on Washington’s time.  The US needed to impose a solution on Arabs in the aftermath of the first Persian Gulf War, and at the same time make it look credible.

Since 1989, Baker had been attempting to engage Arab nations in discussions with Israel. After struggling to achieve a significant progress, he decided it was time to adopt a new strategy. Between March and October 1991, Baker made eight trips to West Asia, meeting with leaders from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and a Palestinian delegation. During these meetings, he warned Arab leaders about the repercussions of refusing to negotiate with Israel. Meanwhile, to shift blame for the lack of peace in the region, he publicly criticized the Arabs, particularly the Palestinians. By leveraging the media, Baker created an environment where Arab nations felt they could not withdraw from negotiations without being seen as opposing peace, as noted by Aaron Miller, one of his advisors on West Asia.

Since Baker’s successful pull at Arabs to concede to Israel, the so-called dead cat diplomacy became the strategy of choice for American politicians at any negotiating table. Washington seems to believe that it is in a propitious position regardless of what’s happening on the ground, due to its control over media and expertise at playing mind games. But what goes down in the field of diplomacy and optics, must eventually come down.

Iran’s retaliation against Israel and an opportunity to absolve Israel

In recent days, the West has been trying to throw its weight behind Israel as the regime awaits an Iranian retaliation for the assassination of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh on Iranian soil. This support includes both military assistance and efforts to vindicate the Zionists and justify their latest terror acts.

In a joint statement released on Monday, the leaders of the United States, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy said they had expressed their support for “the defense of Israel against Iranian aggression” during recent discussions.

“We called on Iran to stand down its ongoing threats of a military attack against Israel and discussed the serious consequences for regional security should such an attack take place,” the statement added. It did not, however, condemn Israel’s killing of a Hamas leader on Iranian soil, which is considered to be a violation of Iran’s sovereignty, as well as a blatant breach of international law.
Following the assassination of Haniyeh on July 31st, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei pledged to avenge his death, referring to him as a “dear guest” to Iran. Multiple Iranian officials have reiterated the vow in the past days.

In their statement, the American and European politicians also expressed support towards efforts to “reach a ceasefire and hostage release deal in Gaza”. However, their statement omitted any mention of the widespread reports and allegations accusing Israel, particularly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, of hindering peace efforts in Gaza.

A day earlier, Germany, France, and Britain issued a similar statement, asserting that Iran would bear responsibility if the latest “opportunity” for a ceasefire in Gaza does not succeed. The E3 concluded that any potential Iranian strikes on Israel could ultimately derail the ongoing negotiations between Hamas and the Israeli regime, after over 10 months of the regime’s onslaught and decimation in Gaza, and its killing of a lead negotiator on the other side of the table.

“These statements are nothing new. The West has been a major facilitator of Israeli crimes against Palestinians and provides unwavering support to the regime across all fronts,” Mohsen Pakayeen, a former Iranian diplomat spending several years as an ambassador to Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Thailand, and Zambia told the Tehran Times.

“The West knew Iran and Hezbollah would respond to the assassinations of top resistance leaders in Beirut and Tehran. Washington and its other Western allies allowed Israel to move ahead with its dangerous plans, and are now attempting to insulate it against the consequences of its actions. They are essentially asking Iran to refrain from responding to the aggression or risk being known as peace-blockers in Gaza, while they know very well that Israel is the one obstructing the establishment of a ceasefire,” the former diplomat explained.

However, Pakayeen added that the West’s latest efforts to protect Israel’s security and reputation are unlikely to be successful. “Iran will go ahead with its retaliation plans regardless of what the West says. Furthermore, public opinion is no longer as easily swayed as it once was, especially after everything the regime has done in the past ten months.”

First Published by Tehran Times