During his election campaign, Trump promised to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours, resolve the Gaza crisis, and presented himself as a man of peace. He even claimed that he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. However, following Trump’s return to power, not only has the war in Ukraine continued, but Gaza has become the site of a full-scale genocide. At the same time, military tensions in Africa, conflict between India and Pakistan, and a full-blown war between Israel and Iran have erupted. War is no longer merely a military event — it is increasingly becoming a reflection of the decadence of capitalism and its way of life.

In 1980, despite anticipating the possibility of a military confrontation with Iraq, the Islamic bourgeoisie was taken by surprise and entered the war on 22 September of that year. Simultaneous attacks by land, air, and sea placed Iran in a difficult position. More than four decades later, on 12 June 2025, a similar incident occurred — this time on a far broader and more complex scale. The operation involved sabotage of infrastructure by Mossad agents, the launch of drones from within Iranian territory, missile strikes from both inside and outside the borders, and, most significantly, direct aerial attacks by fighter jets. As of the time of writing, the operation is still ongoing.

It appears that the criminals of the Islamic Republic viewed the negotiation process with delusion, believing that as long as the talks had not officially collapsed, there would be no risk of a military strike. In this context, there has been speculation that the negotiations were, in fact, a cover for preparing the attack. The Wall Street Journal has also highlighted this issue:

“In Twist, U.S. Diplomacy Served as Cover for Israeli Surprise Attack.”[1]

Prior to the launch of the operation, American officials stated that the United States would not support a potential Israeli attack, not even providing assistance with aerial refuelling. On the surface, this stance appeared to signal a form of goodwill towards the Islamic bourgeoisie. However, following the attacks, it became clear that not only had the operation been carried out with “full and extensive coordination” with the United States, but the German Chancellor had also been informed in advance.

First and foremost, it is essential to emphasise one point: setting aside the propaganda and posturing of the Democratic gangsters, the similarities between the two criminal states of Israel and Iran are strikingly clear. Both are ideological; in both, religion plays a central role in the power structure. Both have a long history of repression and killings, both have had or currently have thousands of political prisoners, and both play a fundamental role in systematic crimes against their own people and others. This list could easily be extended further.

Israeli warmongers have claimed, in explaining the timing of their attacks, that Iran is currently in its weakest position, as its proxy forces—particularly Hezbollah—have been weakened and lack the capacity to respond effectively. Meanwhile, the criminal Islamic bourgeoisie assert that, in addition to the United States, NATO is also supporting Israel, either directly or indirectly. It appears that Israel’s allies are playing a significant role in these attacks by providing precise intelligence and operational support.

Previously, the United States and its allies justified wars using slogans such as “defence of human rights”, “protection of human dignity”, and “the fight against terrorism”. In light of the ongoing genocide in Gaza and the support of this atrocity by Democratic warmongers, the concept of “defending human rights” has lost its meaning. Today, Democratic politicians cite “self-defence” to justify and support Israel’s military actions — including lethal operations. Among the United States’ key allies, only Japan has officially condemned Israel’s attacks. Likewise, among Iran’s neighbours, countries such as Turkey, the UAE, and Qatar have adopted critical positions and condemned the strikes.

Netanyahu has declared that this war “will continue for as long as it takes,” as Israel’s goal is not merely the destruction of Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities but ultimately regime change — replacing it with a government aligned with and friendly towards Israel. Israel hopes that, through sustained military operations, the Iranian regime will gradually weaken and eventually collapse, much like what occurred in Syria. In this context, the war criminal Netanyahu addressed the “proud people of Iran,” claiming, “We hope our operation will clear path to your freedom” and describing the current Iranian government as a “wicked and oppressive regime.”

All states, whether presenting themselves as peace-loving or inherently warlike, whether democratic or dictatorial, ultimately sacrifice the working class as cannon fodder in imperialist wars and are all complicit in war crimes. Contrary to the rhetoric of the gangster Democrats, the Israeli government—like the corrupt Islamic bourgeoisie—pursues its own imperialist interests and has been equipped with the latest technologies in intelligence, security, military, and more solely by the gangster Democrats to further their imperialist agendas, thereby enabling it to carry out its crimes more effectively and easily.

The pro-Western opposition, regardless of their ideological differences (whether the right of capital or the left of capitalist), has viewed the escalation of tensions as a glimmer of hope, hoping that a military attack might overthrow the Islamic criminals and pave the way for their entry into the political arena. These factions benefit from extensive propaganda resources and receive support from Western governments, Israel, and certain Arab countries in line with imperialist interests. Apparently, in fulfilling this role and following the Iran-Israel war, the Western propaganda machine has become highly active in managing public opinion within Iran. Some of these media outlets, which had been shut down during Trump’s presidency due to austerity measures—such as Voice of America, which ceased broadcasting on 15 March—have resumed their activities with the onset of the war between Iran and Israel.

It must be emphasised that hoping for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic through an airstrike by a foreign country is nothing but an illusion. A clear example of this is Iraq after the First Gulf War; even with the imposition of a no-fly zone, the ruling structure in Iraq remained unchanged. Historical experience shows that foreign attacks often strengthen nationalism, even when carried out by seemingly revolutionary forces. One notable example is the advance of the Red Army into Poland in 1920, which resulted in the Polish proletariat turning to their national bourgeoisie rather than pursuing a social revolution.

After taking the Islamic Republic by surprise and killing dozens of military commanders, including Hossein Salami, the commander-in-chief of the Revolutionary Guards, the new commander, Mohammad Pakpour, vowed that “the gates of hell will soon be opened upon Israel.” In line with this, a mural at Palestine Square in Tehran also displayed a message in Hebrew, which read: “Seek shelter beneath the rubble!”

We have repeatedly emphasised that each imperialist power pursues only its own interests, and this is equally true of the relationship between Iran and Russia. Despite the 30-year “Strategic Partnership” treaty between Tehran and Moscow, and while Iran has supported Russia in the Ukraine war by supplying drones, Moscow has been unwilling to meet Iran’s critical needs—particularly in the field of air defence, which remains a significant weakness of the Islamic Republic—with advanced technology.

This issue has repeatedly caused dissatisfaction even within the ranks of the Islamic bourgeoisie itself. From the perspective of imperialist interests, Russia wants Iran to remain weak, dependent, and needy—not a strong and independent ally. Russia not only delivered the S-300 air defence system belatedly and in an outdated version but later transferred the more advanced S-400 system to Turkey, while still refusing to provide it to Iran. Furthermore, the promised delivery of Su-35 fighter jets has yet to materialise.

As a result, Iran was compelled to develop its indigenous air defence system, the Bavar-373, which is estimated to have capabilities comparable to the S-300. Meanwhile, Israel, in the initial phase of its attacks, has attempted to disable or weaken the air defence systems in the western part of the country through close-range sabotage, cyber-attacks, and precise targeting.

The Islamic bourgeoisie also carries out its attacks—comprising drones and especially missiles—in several waves each night. As in previous instances, the interception and neutralisation of Iranian missiles by Israel’s partners, notably the United States, the United Kingdom, Jordan, and other countries, has been made possible. Additionally, some NATO countries are unofficially and behind the scenes supporting Israel’s operations. The British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, stated in an interview with the BBC that he neither rules out nor confirms the possibility of sending British fighter jets to Israel, similar to what occurred in April and October of last year. Meanwhile, Trump, when asked about the potential involvement of the United States in these attacks, said he was unwilling to comment.

The spokesperson for the President of Israel announced that Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), informed Isaac Herzog that Iran’s nuclear facilities in Natanz have suffered “serious damage” as a result of extensive Israeli attacks.[2] The fundamental question is: why is the Director General of the IAEA reporting to one party amid an ongoing war? Does this not suggest that the Agency, like the “den of thieves” (the United Nations), has become a tool serving the imperialist interests of both great and lesser powers?

For the Islamic bourgeoisie, this war is a battle for survival. Although Iran’s responses continue daily, if the Islamic bourgeoisie perceives itself to be under a serious threat, it will deploy the full power of its arsenal in defence.

The Islamic bourgeoisie does not want the United States to become directly involved in the war and has warned the US, Britain, and France to refrain from any support for Israel in Tehran’s retaliatory attacks; otherwise, their military bases in the region will be targeted.

Following Israel’s initial attacks on Iran, Trump once again spoke with the language of a gangster[3] to the Islamic bourgeoisie, calling for an agreement on their nuclear programme and warning: “The next attacks, which are already being planned, will be even more ruthless.” He added:

“I have told them that that the United States makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the world, BY FAR, and that Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come – And they know how to use it.”[4]

During World War I, Rosa Luxemburg believed that to normalise war crimes, brutality in action must be accompanied by a corresponding savagery in thoughts and feelings; so that not only does a bloodbath ensue, but it is also regarded as a matter of pride.

Criminal Trump vividly embodied Rosa Luxemburg’s words; he proudly spoke of the greater lethality and destructiveness of American military equipment and emphasised that Friday was a “great day” for Israel because “great American equipment” was used. This warmonger also stated that he has no concerns about the outbreak of a regional war following Israel’s attacks.

Wartime conditions intensify the police-state atmosphere in society and, through war propaganda, poison the working class; consequently, they do not provide a suitable environment for the working class to mobilise, instead paving the way for blatant repression. If we look back at historical memory, we see that the last flickers of class struggle following the events of 1979 were suppressed with the onset of the reactionary Iran-Iraq war. Just as in that era, military forces at this juncture have also issued special numbers for reporting suspicious activities.

The specific conditions of the First World War cannot be generalised to all wars; a clear example of this is the outbreak of the Second World War. Setting aside the workers’ strikes in Italy towards the end of the war, the Second World War, unlike the First, neither was able to nor could provide a prospect for a global struggle of the working class.

Unlike wartime conditions, an economic crisis not only provides the necessary material basis for the expansion of workers’ protests but also creates the conditions for a more intensified class struggle to emerge. In times of war, it is the duty of internationalists to rise in defence of proletarian internationalism, to expose the imperialist nature of these conflicts and their material foundations to the public, and to loudly proclaim that all such confrontations are directed against the working class. Workers gain nothing from becoming involved in these wars and must emphasise that the true enemy, wherever they may be, is in their own home.

It is merely propaganda to claim that Israel, through its precise attacks, aims to neutralise Iran’s nuclear programme or eliminate the political and military leaders of the Islamic bourgeoisie. In reality, Israel has so far carried out attacks against civilian facilities, including the South Pars gas field, the Farda Motors car factory in Borujerd, Ashtarian Machinery in Lorestan, and other similar centres, up to the time of writing this article.

Unfortunately, compared to their class brothers and sisters in Iran, the Israeli working class is far more influenced by nationalism and religion. This has prevented the Israeli working class from establishing a history of struggle, allowing the Israeli bourgeoisie to easily mobilise them for war. In contrast, despite all setbacks, the Iranian working class has a far stronger tradition of struggle compared to their counterparts in Israel—especially given that one of the most militant proletarian battalions in the Middle East belongs to Iran and has recorded many proud battles in its historical memory. This war could have a negative and destructive impact on the Iranian working class, hindering not only the continuation of their struggles but also their advancement to higher levels.

The war between Iran and Israel is not the result of decisions made by warmongering leaders, but rather the outcome of specific conditions in the history of capitalism, and these tensions are likely to continue in the future. We have previously shown in detail that the conflict between the Islamic bourgeoisie and Western democracies—and now the war between Iran and Israel—has nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear programme. Iran, as one of the local gangsters, claims regional power; however, Western democracies are unwilling to recognise such a role for the Islamic bourgeoisie. On the other hand, weakening Iran as an ally of Russia effectively means weakening Russia itself, and ultimately forms part of the strategy to contain China, since limiting Iran’s influence will also obstruct China’s advance.

Therefore, the responsibility still weighs heavily on the shoulders of internationalists (communist lefts): to steadfastly defend proletarian internationalism, expose the imperialist nature of these wars, and clarify their material foundations to public consciousness, especially to the working class. It must be proclaimed loudly that all these conflicts are against the interests of the working class. The consequences of the war between Iran and Israel will not be confined to the Middle East, as capitalism is a global system of militarism, and its impact on the working class worldwide will be severe. These wars reflect the declining trajectory of global capitalism.

History has shown that the only force capable of ending the bourgeois killing machine that is war is the working class. It was the danger of the German Revolution that forced the bourgeoisie to sign the armistice. The same thing is always true. War criminals only refrain from conflict when there is the danger of the proletariat preparing themselves for the class war. Although the global working class is not in such a position today, the evolution of the class struggle can create such a future for the proletariat.

War has become a way of life for capitalism in its decadent age. Capitalism cannot provide a future, as it only spreads brutality and barbarism to more areas. It is an illusion to ask the warmongers to stop the war. The peace of the warmongers can only be a smokescreen in war-seeking capitalism. From within the peace of capitalism, only the flames of war can spread. Only the class war of the workers can offer an alternative to the barbarism of capitalism, as the proletariat has no country to defend, and its struggle must transcend national borders and develop on an international scale. Only the global working class, by transforming capitalist war into a war against capitalism and thereby overthrowing capitalism worldwide, can eliminate the material basis of imperialist wars and bring lasting peace to humanity.

Workers have no country!

Down with the imperialist war!

Long live the war between the classes!

 

Internationalist Voice

15 June 2025

Notes:

[1] The Wall Street Journal.

[2] RadioFarda.

[3] Deal or Attack? Banditry as the Strategy of the Bourgeoisie.

[4] Time Magazine.

 

Download as PDF