By Matt Underwood Khamenei: Iran defeated US, Israel in June’s 12-Day War? Well, that’s certainly a statement. It seems the narrative being spun is that Iran emerged victorious from a conflict, specifically a 12-day war involving the United States and Israel. Considering the realities on the ground, and the nature of these claims, it feels like we’re entering the realm of the absurd, or perhaps, the hilariously delusional.
The common understanding, the one supported by readily available information, paints a very different picture. Iran’s claim of victory seems to be based on an incredibly loose definition of the word “win.” Let’s be clear, if the measure of victory is survival alone, then perhaps, technically, Iran “won.” But is that truly a win when the alternative should be obvious? Is it a win when your airspace is essentially a no-fly zone controlled by your adversaries, who are free to bomb strategic locations with impunity?
The tone surrounding this claim, as expressed by those seemingly taking issue with the claim, suggests a degree of mockery. Phrases like “I’m bleeding, making me the victor” and “It’s only a flesh wound!” immediately bring to mind scenes of utter defeat portrayed as some sort of Pyrrhic victory. It’s the kind of thing one says when they’re grasping at straws, desperately trying to find a positive spin on an undeniable setback.
Furthermore, some comments reference the evacuation of people before the bombing runs and the complete lack of Iran’s ability to defend its skies. It’s hard to imagine how this could be considered anything other than a complete and utter display of military and technological dominance by the opposing forces. The fact that the Iranian military was so clearly outmatched, and that their nuclear program and supporting infrastructure were targeted and reportedly damaged, would seemingly negate any claims of a decisive win.
Adding to the absurdity, we see parallels drawn to other examples of blatant misinformation, like the claim that the 2020 election was stolen. This paints a picture of a leader and a government that are disconnected from reality, who feel confident enough to sell their own citizenry a narrative that is plainly false. It also makes you wonder whether the people actually believe this, or if it is the price of keeping the regime afloat.
The comments also touch on the devastating emigration rates out of Iran, which further undercuts any claims of triumph. If the nation was genuinely thriving and its people content, one would expect a different trend. It feels like the opposite of a good job. People are voting with their feet, heading towards countries that offer better prospects, not exactly a sign of a successful regime.
Even the notion of “allowing” Iran to survive, as a means of avoiding a larger conflict, speaks volumes. It’s a pragmatic calculation, a strategic choice to avoid a potentially devastating war. It’s a far cry from a resounding military victory and a very different thing from a declaration of victory. It suggests that Iran’s leaders are lucky to be in charge at all, thanks to a cautious approach by their foes.
There’s also an element of dark humor in the situation. The idea of the Supreme Leader taking shelter in a bunker while F-35s rain bombs down is the stuff of satirical comedy. The fact that this could be a point of pride, or spun as some kind of victory, is mind-boggling. It further highlights the disconnect between the official narrative and the actual events.
And then there’s the question of motivation. Why make such a claim? Is it for internal consumption, an attempt to bolster morale and maintain control? Is it a way to save face, to prevent the perception of weakness? Perhaps it’s a combination of both. Whatever the reason, it’s clear that the narrative is designed to reinforce the regime’s authority.
Ultimately, the claim of victory is a testament to the power of propaganda and delusion. It is a carefully crafted narrative designed to shape perceptions, regardless of the reality on the ground. It’s a reminder that in the world of politics, particularly under authoritarian rule, the truth can often be a casualty.