Iran is attacking Israel directly for the first time and the ARD talk show “Caren Miosga” asks: Is the situation in the Middle East now escalating? It’s about breaking a taboo, atomic bombs and dire fears. Foreign Minister Baerbock received criticism – and Germany’s Iran policy was torn apart.
For almost 45 years, Israel and Iran fought a war under the radar. A shadow war that carefully avoided direct conflict because escalation in the region was considered too frightening for both sides. This paradigm ended on Saturday evening with the Islamic Republic’s first attack with more than 300 drones and cruise missiles. On Sunday evening, the ARD talk show “Caren Miosga” adapts the topic at short notice and discusses a possible expansion of the proxy war between Israel and Iran, the worst fears in the Middle East – and a new role for Germany.
“A taboo break”: Natalie Amiri with Caren Miosga.
(Photo: ARD/Thomas Ernst)
“New level of escalation”, “new dimension”, “new intensity”. All of the discussants and talk show host Caren Miosga agree on one thing: with Tehran’s first direct attack on Israel, a kind of change in times has taken place. “It’s a breach of a taboo,” says German-Iranian journalist Natalie Amiri, summing up the aggression, which was almost completely repelled by the Israeli “Iron Dome” missile shield, the USA, Great Britain and Jordan. In detail, however, there are definitely different perspectives on the events and the meaning of the weekend.
Amiri says Iran is using “attrition tactics” and is not aiming for “the big attack.” Rather, the regime intends to “encircle Israel like pliers and drag it into a multi-front war.” Middle East expert Guido Steinberg agrees and explains that the Iranian leadership knew “that it could not cause any damage with the attack” and did not want to achieve “real victims.” “If she had really wanted harm, she would have sent Hezbollah,” says the Islamic scholar. Rather, it was about a message to the inside, to the hardliners in the regime, who wanted retaliation for the Israeli air strikes on the Iranian consulate in Damascus at the beginning of April.
Djir-Sarai: Iran wanted to test Israel’s defenses
Bijan Djir-Sarai has a different opinion: The FDP’s general secretary, who was born in Tehran, is “not sure that the Iranians didn’t want to cause harm.” He believes they wanted to test “what defense capabilities Israel has.” Now Iran’s representatives would continue the war, perhaps with greater intensity than before.
These so-called proxies include the terrorist militia Hezbollah, which operates primarily from Lebanon. Despite the Hamas war, Steinberg believes that the conflict between Iran and its opponents, including Israel, is much more important and threatening for the region. “I think a preemptive strike by Israel against Hezbollah is possible,” says the Middle East expert when talk show host Miosga asks about Israel’s reaction. While a live link to the ARD correspondent in Tel Aviv brings the new information that the war cabinet there has not yet been able to reach an agreement and will meet again, Steinberg considers a massive attack on Hezbollah to be realistic because the USA and the G7 are under under no circumstances do they want to see a direct backlash against Iran. In addition, the US armed forces would now be represented in large numbers in the region and could provide support, which is likely to change under a renewed presidency of Donald Trump.
Should Germany support Israel’s preemptive strike against Hezbollah? “I wouldn’t go that far,” Djir-Sarai replies to Miosga’s question: “Nobody expects military answers from us, so we shouldn’t have this debate like that.” Steinberg then explains that Europe and Germany are hardly any important players in the Middle East anymore. “Security policy is needed there and neither the EU nor Germany are acting as security policy actors,” says the Middle East expert. Germany even “refused to be a player in security policy for too long.”
Terror financing must be taken
So what do you do if you want to contain Tehran but don’t want war? Here the three discussants are once again in agreement by sharply criticizing Germany’s and Europe’s current Iran policy. “When Iran expanded in the region after 2015,” says Steinberg, citing Syria and Yemen as examples, “Europe hardly reacted.” “There has to be consistency; the mullahs have never experienced that before,” demands Amiri. Although the Islamic Republic has become increasingly radicalized and increasingly inhumane in recent years, no federal government has taken any action against Iranian banks in Europe whose money finances terrorist organizations, the journalists said. An Iranian ambassador has never been expelled and trade with Tehran is actually increasing.
Djir-Sarai advocates a new EU Iran strategy. The previous one was “completely wrong” and “extraordinarily naive”: “We only dealt with the nuclear program, but ignored the Iranian missile program and hardly talked about the human rights situation.” The regime must finally be put under massive pressure and, for example, put the Islamic Revolutionary Guard on the European terror list.
Speaking of the nuclear program: According to expert Steinberg, Iran is “an emerging nuclear state.” That means Tehran “can produce the material for nuclear weapons within a few weeks.” And then within a year a nuclear bomb, although the production of warheads would take a little longer. “The nuclear program is no longer reversible,” says the Islamic scholar, adding that Tehran will have nuclear power at some point.
Criticism of Baerbock: Hostility comes from Iran
But even without a nuclear bomb, Djir-Sarai sees Iran as the “central problem in the Middle East.” According to the FDP General Secretary, as long as the regime can continue to support and finance terrorist organizations such as Hamas or Hezbollah, there will be no peace. He doesn’t like the fact that Federal Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock is now calling on all sides to de-escalate after Tehran’s attack. “The hostility comes from Iran. Israel is not threatening Iran, but Iran wants to wipe out Israel. We have to name that specifically.”
Amiri also shoots against the Green politician. “If Baerbock says that Hamas has to lay down its arms so that the peace process can begin, then I see that as naive,” says the journalist. “The peace process begins when Tehran is contained.” But that would only work if there were “no more empty words” and the fight of the Iranian civilian population against the regime was finally taken seriously. “The public’s approval is no longer given,” explains Amiri, who headed the ARD studio in Tehran from 2015 to 2020. The people are neither behind the proxies in the region nor the billions of dollars invested in weapons. Djir-Sarai also sees this resistance as an opportunity: “Civil society in Iran does not want to change the regime, but rather abolish it,” says the FDP man.
But perhaps it is already too late to stop Iran, says Middle East expert Steinberg shortly before the end. After all, the country can now rely on Russia’s solidarity and China’s support. The prospects are not good for Israel and Germany, both of which are now struggling to find the right answers to the weekend’s paradigm shift.