The Mindset of Self-Sacrifice: Why does Iran seek its own self-destruction?

By Manolis Skoulikas

We are surprised to hear in the West, the Revolutionary Guards accusing their unyielding negotiators, Abbas Araqchi and Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, of being “traitors”, with the latter being forced to resign by the Iranian deep state. Iran’s uncompromising policy, combined with its erratic maximalist negotiating positions, undermines any notion of Western negotiating logic and pushes Trump to extreme measures that would result in the mass destruction of Iran’s infrastructure, with horrific consequences for its population.

How can we explain this incomprehensibly extreme stance that leads to the self-sacrifice of an entire people? To answer this complex question, we must examine a series of parameters that define the modern Iranian way of thinking:

1. Islamist Mentality: As a theocratic regime, Iran relies on the principles of the Quran, a text written in the Middle Ages addressed to nomadic Bedouins, who depended entirely on their power to defend their herds and families from their equally barbaric compatriots who plundered anyone weaker than them. In such a culture, there is no negotiation, only the absolute imposition of the stronger. Although the areas initially conquered by the Arabs were civilized and did not adhere to such mindsets, the religious mindset of Islam, nevertheless, remained unchanged within the text of the Quran. Thus, Islam does not negotiate but fights to the bitter end until it prevails globally. This may perplex us, given our more utilitarian Western mindset, but it is a sad reality that events have confirmed throughout the centuries. Furthermore, the official position of Islam is that any area historically conquered by Islam belongs to it and must be reconquered—among them Israel, Spain, and the Balkans. Clearly, a percentage of Muslims do not operate with this extreme mindset, including some of their leaders, but as an overarching mentality, Islam seeks total dominance over any “infidel”. In radical Islamist societies, voices of humanitarianism and reason are simply silenced or exterminated, as in any totalitarian regime. Islam does not consider that war ever stops and officially applies the religiously imposed technique of Taqiyya, of evasive false statements and false submission, until the moment of the final confrontation. In this context, negotiation equates to humiliation, and humiliation to death, as radical Islamist regimes share the medieval mentality of the Bedouin nomads that the Quran solidified.
2. Wounded Dignity of Middle Eastern Muslims: The dignity of Middle Eastern Muslims has been irreparably wounded since World War I when they were manipulated by the British and subsequently fragmented into fictitious emirates. As a peak of the humiliation of Arabs, the Palestinian Mandate Authorities demolished every Arab village near guerrilla groups resisting Jewish settlement and charged the demolition costs to the Arab inhabitants. The systematic unilateral support of the West for Israel has systematically humiliated the Islamic world of the region, which almost messianically awaits its revenge.
3. Religious Righteousness: The theocratic “sense of justice” includes the moral advantage of the victim but also a vengeful judgment against anyone who does not offer themselves for the glory of Islam. We can better understand this extreme mentality if we recall the words of another madman of our continent: “If the German people are not strong enough to prevail, they do not deserve to survive” (Adolf Hitler 1945—while ordering the complete destruction of Germany’s infrastructure).
4. Iranian Superiority Complex: Iranians have an imperial superiority complex and a corresponding devaluation of their opponents that traces back to their immediate and distant past from the times of the Medes, the Sassanids, and the Safavids. Thus, their retreat to a crude offspring of economic migrants representing a country with a history one-tenth that of Persia is inconceivable.
5. Revolutionary Guards’ Crimes: The heinous crimes of the leaders and many lower-ranking members of the Revolutionary Guards do not allow them a safe exit in the event of the theocracy’s downfall. Most will pay with their lives. Therefore, since retreating in negotiations can be seen as weakness, an internal overthrow is not far from the horizon.
6. Totalitarian Regimes: Totalitarian regimes—and especially theocratic ones—serve as echo chambers in which extreme mentalities become even more extreme, and people detach from reality in the absence of opposing views that would dismantle the fragile, imaginary arguments of their fanaticism.
7. Ideologically Extreme Regimes: Ideologically extreme regimes—particularly those based on religious intolerance—operate with a paranoid duality of good and evil, a mentality that has its roots in the dualistic ontology of Zoroastrianism, which was the prevailing religion of the region before Islam. In this context, there is no prospect of negotiation with the “American devil.”
8. Perception of Trump: Iran has realized that Trump does not always do what he says, and many of his threats are mere bluster. Given the heightened international disgrace of a crime against humanity, such as the destruction of fundamental infrastructure for Iran’s survival, they might be willing to risk that Trump will not escalate further.
9. Unreliable US and Israel: The US and Israel have proven particularly unreliable in their commitments and have violated ceasefires and negotiation terms to attack their opponents. This significantly diminishes the credibility of any negotiations or agreements.
10. Self-Sacrifice in Islam: Last but not least is the factor of the self-sacrificial imperative of Islam and the posthumous promise of paradise for the martyrs of faith. Even if this is not fully believed by the mullahs and their minions, the mindset of self-sacrifice is foundational in the masochistic and paranoid structures that characterize some of the population of the troubled Middle Eastern region.

At this moment, the most expensive answer on the planet corresponds to the question: “What is the breaking point of the mullah regime?” However, as Stalin demonstrated in 1941, established totalitarian regimes do not hesitate to sacrifice their people en masse, even amid crushing military defeat, to avoid their fall.

From this deadlock, it seems that only China has the capability to extricate Trump from Iran without keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed. However, this agreement must also include free passage through the global straits. Free navigation and open sea trade routes mean uninterrupted access for China to 60% of global markets and its economic supremacy over the US by 2050. Is Trump willing to relinquish American omnipotence and be remembered as the president who lost to China?