Israel’s Attack on Iran: A New Phase in the World War

Israel opened a new chapter in the ongoing imperialist Third World War on 13 June by launching a large-scale military attack targeting over 250 locations in Iran. During the same wave of attacks, which lasted for hours, various methods and means were employed simultaneously – military facilities, nuclear sites, refineries, and airports were bombed, while top-level military leaders, including the chief of general staff, and nuclear experts were assassinated. Since then, Israel has continued its assaults deep inside Iran, while Iran, in retaliation, has initiated missile attacks, filling the skies of the Middle East with bombs, missiles, and aircraft carrying death and destruction.

The imperialist war had already entered a new phase with the latest escalation triggered by Hamas’s attack on 7 October 2023 in Gaza, and the current events are an almost uninterrupted continuation –an extension– of that very phase. With the backing of Western imperialist powers, primarily the US, Israel has since pursued a comprehensive offensive strategy across nearly the entire region. Over a vast area –from Gaza to Lebanon, Syria, and partly Yemen– it has either neutralised or severely weakened the forces hostile to it. The regional power standing directly behind all these forces was Iran. Thus, the blows struck here were, in essence, blows struck against Iran itself. Not content with targeting only Iran’s proxies or allied forces and nations, Israel escalated further by assassinating Hamas leader Haniyeh in Tehran – a direct strike at Iran’s heart. In short, this entire process was inevitably advancing toward a point where Iran itself would become the direct target of attack.

During the days when HTS (Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham) had launched a rapid march to power and seized control of Aleppo in Syria, the pages of Marksist Tutum once again outlined the broader process, assessing that these developments revealed the US had transitioned into the second phase of its Greater Middle East Project (BOP). (Elif Çağlı, Notes on the Latest Developments on the Middle East, December 1, 2024).

In this second phase of the BOP, the most critical focal point was undoubtedly Iran. In another article published around the same time, we drew attention to this, stating: “It appears that the US seeks to make significant advances on the Middle Eastern front of the world war. The primary objectives are the overthrow of the mullah regime in Iran, the redrawing of state borders—originally drawn at the end of the First World War—according to current power dynamics, and the creation of new states. It is attempting to push destruction to its absolute limit before moving into the phase of ‘implementing necessary adjustments.’ Whether or not this is fully accomplished, the aim is to swiftly shift focus to the next link in the chain: the Pacific front.” (Marksist Tutum, What Do the Latest Developments in the Middle East Tell Us?, December 3, 2024)

This is precisely the significance of the process that began with Israel’s attack on 13 June. For those who correctly grasped the broader meaning and context of this ongoing war, this development came as no surprise. A proper understanding of the nature of this war forms the foundation for determining the correct stance to be adopted by the working class.

Flawed assessments

Superficial views about the nature of the war remain widespread in oppositional bourgeois media worldwide and among certain left-wing circles. While it’s possible to understand oppositional bourgeois tendencies, it is both tragic and telling that those who claim revolutionary and socialist credentials –who profess to analyse events through the lens of Marxism– should produce such shallow analyses. One encounters these reductive assessments everywhere: from claims that Netanyahu started this war to save his own government from crisis, to assertions that the sole objective is to force Iran to negotiate from a weaker position; from theories that Trump doesn’t want this war but is being pushed into it by Israel-Netanyahu, to arguments that the US hasn’t yet decided to join the war and that conflict doesn’t serve American interests. These assessments completely overlook the fundamental reality of the ongoing imperialist world war.

To suggest that Trump is unlikely to want war because he came to power using anti-war rhetoric is to abandon Marxism. Demagogues like Trump, as has always been true throughout history, will tell you exactly what you want to hear to deceive and manipulate the broad working masses. To fail to see the profound historical crisis of world capitalism, to not understand that imperialist war dynamics stem from this deep crisis, and to be unable to diagnose that the war’s main parties are the US-Europe bloc on one side and China-Russia on the other represents a staggering lack of insight. At this stage, not to recognise that the wars raging worldwide since at least the turn of the millennium are interconnected – increasingly converging into a unified whole through strengthening common threads – would signify complete intellectual bankruptcy. This is a world war, and precisely because it is, even German Chancellor Friedrich Merz –whose country appears to have no direct involvement– declares: “Israel has taken on this dirty work for all of us. All I can say is that I respect the Israeli military and government for having the courage to do this.” With remarkable brazenness, Merz is effectively saying: Israel is handling our business there. Meanwhile, Russia warns the US against direct involvement in the war, while both China and Russia deploy ships to Hormuz.

It may be necessary to briefly address one reason for this failure to grasp the reality of a world war today. The First and Second World Wars primarily unfolded geographically across the European continent. This shaped European societies’ perception of what constitutes a world war. When Europe’s core nations and territories are not themselves active battlefields, these societies and their intellectuals struggle to comprehend the phenomenon of a world war. Yet across vast regions – from the Middle East to Ukraine (itself European territory), the Caucasus, Africa, Pakistan, and the increasingly tense Asia-Pacific front (particularly the Taiwan-China conflict) – wars rage, millions perish, populations are displaced, and hunger and poverty escalate. That the major powers are invariably involved in these conflicts, with largely the same alignment of forces recurring, can hardly be coincidental. Precisely for these reasons, a growing number of writers and analysts are now compelled to employ the term “Third World War” when describing recent developments – though its usage remains tentative. The dominant discourse still frames it through hesitant questions: “Is it starting?” or “Has it begun?”

In the context of the current Israel-Iran war, we encounter yet another problematic stance: an approach based on nationalist-statist mindset that advocates siding with Iran. It is absolutely true that US imperialism represents the aggressive party in the broader imperialist world war – just as together with Israeli Zionism it serves as the offensive side in this specific Israel-Iran front. There is also no question that Israel stands as one of the most reactionary forces in the region and globally, that it is an indispensable ally of US and Western imperialism, and that it strives to destroy the Palestinian people. Consequently, it is of paramount importance that the working class in these most powerful and wealthy imperialist countries makes their own governments and Israel primary targets of struggle. This holds true for countries like Turkey as well.

However, this does not mean we must automatically defend Iran against these aggressors. Iran is no “oppressed” or “small” nation, but rather a major regional power pursuing its own imperial policies. If Israel is a reactionary regional power, we cannot forget that Iran too is a reactionary regional force with nuclear capabilities and ballistic missiles. Just as Israel serves as a partner to the US and other Western imperialist powers, Iran functions as a regional partner of major imperialist powers like China and Russia – and this war is fundamentally being waged between these two camps.

Moreover, we cannot ignore the fact that Iran’s fascist Mullah regime systematically oppresses Iran’s working class, socialists, progressives, democrats, women, and minority peoples – particularly the Kurds. As Lenin emphasized, from the working-class perspective, it matters little which side “started” the war or who appears as the “aggressor” – we are not bourgeois strategists who view events through their lens, but rather through the interests of the working class.

From a working-class perspective, it is clear that no stance siding with either Iran or Israel can be justified. The phrase “standing with the Iranian people” may sound positive in distinguishing support from the regime, but it remains ambiguous. Moreover, this approach overlooks the oppressed populations living under the yoke of the Mullah regime’s repression.

Our position is this: We stand for the revolutionary struggle of Iran’s working class against Zionist Israel, the Western imperialist powers behind it, and the masters of Iran’s fascist Mullah regime. The heroic Iranian proletariat –which has waged courageous struggles and paid heavy prices– owes nothing to the Mullah regime and shares no common interests with it.

The Mullah government, already weakened by mass struggles in recent years and the crushing burden of its imperialist policies, has lost working-class support. Should it exploit this war to rally workers behind it and regain strength, a new wave of devastation would await the working class.

As Parisian workers demonstrated during the 1871 Franco-Prussian War, the correct path for Iranian workers is to refuse support to the Mullah regime against Israeli aggression and transform the war into a class war against both external aggressors and their domestic class enemy. A working class taking this path would win the sympathy and support of the global proletariat and oppressed masses. Even now, Western workers remain largely unconvinced to support a war against Iran, which is proof that this perspective is far from groundless.

At this juncture, it is significant that several Iranian workers’ organisations in a joint declaration not only condemned Israel and the US for their imperialist aggression but also unequivocally denounced the Mullah regime, refusing to offer it wartime support. Neither for Iranian workers nor for the labouring masses across the region can any good come from the great powers or regional states. A mere bird’s-eye view of recent events in the area suffices to prove this. The Palestinian, Syrian, Lebanese, and Iranian peoples have all endured immense suffering – and not a single bourgeois state has brought them relief. Countless examples attest to this truth: from Turkey’s repeatedly exposed hypocrisy on Israel, to Syria’s new Islamist administration granting Israel permission to use its airspace.

Another critical issue manifests in the class character of demands raised against the war. Many revolutionary socialist circles in the West –despite their many weaknesses– have adopted a commendable approach: targeting Israel and their own imperialist governments in their propaganda, addressing workers and unions in anti-war struggles, and advocating class-based methods of resistance. Particularly significant are concrete demands like using strike action to block arms, ammunition, and military supply shipments. In stark contrast, much of Turkey’s left frames even basic demands like severing trade with Israel merely as exposes of state hypocrisy – failing to articulate them as calls for working-class action. This reflects the alarming erosion of class-struggle perspectives, not just here but across all political issues.

The struggle of Israel’s working class holds particular significance here. The primary force resisting the Zionist expansionism and aggressive policies of the Israeli state must be Israeli workers themselves. As in Iran, the correct line of struggle for the proletariat here is to transform the war into a domestic class war and overthrow bourgeois rule.

That Israeli workers, like working masses everywhere under conditions of declining consciousness and organisation, largely side with their state is no justification for treating them as enemies. Rhetoric that fails to distinguish between the Israeli state and Israeli workers –or between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism – is at best erroneous, and often deliberately poisonous.

On the contrary: Extending the hand of internationalist class solidarity to Israeli workers as our objective class brothers and sisters remains fundamentally essential.

Down with Zionism, down with imperialist aggression!
Down with the worker-hating Mullah regime!
Against imperialist war – class war!
Long live the unity of Middle Eastern workers and the brotherhood of its peoples!
Peace and freedom for the Middle East will come through workers’ revolutions!