Israel’s war of necessity

June 25, 2025

Israel’s war of necessity

From: The Jerusalem Post

By ROBERT G. RABIL

 

The writer, a professor of political science at Florida Atlantic University, was a chief of emergency of the Red Cross in East Beirut during Lebanon’s civil war and a project manager of the US State Department-funded Iraq Research an a discursive look at the myriad of statements on Israel’s war with Iran issued across social media reveals the extent to which the Jewish state has been criticized or vilified for attacking Iran.

Besides condemnations cloaked in virulent antisemitism and anti-Zionism, many questioned Israel’s open war against Iran and its implications for President Donald Trump’s commitment to restore safety and security around the world.

Similarly, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is accused of using the war to bolster public support for his own political career.

Stemming from various ideological backgrounds, these views have missed the central rationale of Israel’s war with Iran. It is a war of necessity!

In fact, Iran’s theocratic regime has waged a political, ideological, and military campaign against Israel since Ayatollah Khomeini seized power in 1979. For decades, Netanyahu, among others, has claimed that a nuclear Iran would represent an existential threat to Israel and that military force is the only sure way to prevent it.

This claim is fundamentally factual because the Iranian regime’s legitimacy rests with advancing a revolutionary foreign policy irreconcilable with the very concept of a Jewish state existing in Muslim lands.

Central to this philosophy, which weds anti-Judaism and anti-Zionism, is the establishment of Israel as an imperialist Christian-Jewish conspiracy against Islam.

Consequently, Iran’s existential threat to Israel has taken shape in the steady weaponizing of this philosophy, the ultimate component of which is the acquisition of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.

On the first page of Khomeini’s treatise on Islamic government that guides Iran’s rule, he writes: “From the very beginning, the historical movement of Islam has had to contend with the Jews, for it was they who first established anti-Islamic propaganda and engaged in various stratagems…

“This activity continues down to the present. Later they were joined by other groups… more satanic than they. These new groups began their imperialist penetration of the Muslim countries about three hundred years ago.”

By citing controversial Koranic verses and adopting Western antisemitic views, Khomeini advocated the radical view of the Jew as a wicked transgressor, intent on dominating the world.

The heirs of his Islamic government, spearheaded by Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei, not only endorsed Khomeini’s ideology and views but also operationalized them by designing plans to threaten the very existence of the Jewish state.

Echoing Khomeini, Khamenei scolded the Jewish nation: “What are you? A forged government and a false nation. They gathered wicked people from all over the world and made something called the Israeli nation.

“Is that a nation? All the malevolent and evil Jews have gathered there… Those [Jews] who went to Israel were malevolent, evil, greedy thieves, and murderers.”

SIGNIFICANTLY, KHOMEINI’S views fashioned the ideologies of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthis, and Iraq’s Hashd al-Sha’bi.

Hezbollah’s open letter (1985), which formally declared the founding of the Shia Islamist party, emphasizes:

“Our primary assumption in our fight against Israel states that the Zionist entity is aggressive from its inception and built on lands wrested from their owners at the expense of the rights of the Muslim people. Therefore, our struggle will end only when this entity is obliterated.”

The late leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, repeatedly vowed to destroy Israel: “It is an aggressive, illegal, and illegitimate entity, which has no future in our land.”

In much the same vein, the Houthis adopted the slogan “God Is Great, Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse the Jews, Victory for Islam.”

This dreadful ideology was not meant for public consumption to legitimate the Iranian regime and its proxies; it is a fundamental part of their raison d’être. As such, the Iranian regime funded, trained, and armed its proxies while at the same time building its military power and nuclear program.

The regime created the so-called axis of resistance, linking all its proxies [Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hashd, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Syrian Assad regime] into a “ring of fire” armed to the teeth with missiles and drones against Israel.

This so-called axis of resistance typified the limbs of Iran, whose chest brandished a panoply of weapons targeting Israel.

To be sure, the Iranian regime has perceived the United States as both the imperialist power behind Israel’s illicit creation and the prodigious oppressor. Designating America as the Great Satan, the Iranian regime has waged a regional and terrorist war against the US.

The Iranian regime has been behind bombing a) the American Embassy in Beirut twice in 1983 and 1984, b) the Marines barracks also in Beirut in 1983, murdering 241 marines, and c) the Khobar Towers complex in Saudi Arabia in 1996.

It also employed its proxies and terrorist networks to murder hundreds of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, save attempting the assassination of senior American officials.

Hamas’s barbaric attack on Israel on October 7 was the opening deadly salvo to put action into Iran’s ideology. Israel’s response has been nothing less than countering Iran’s existential threat to its survival as a refuge and nation of the Jewish people.

And what Israel could not accomplish, the Trump administration has achieved by destroying Iran’s nuclear plants to prevent Iran from weaponizing its nuclear program, safeguarding not only the United States and Israel but also the Middle East at large.

About the Author

Robert Rabil, Ph.D.

Robert Rabil, Ph.D.

Board Member and Senior Fellow

Dr. Robert G. Rabil is Professor of Political Science at Florida Atlantic University. He received his doctorate in Near Eastern and Judaic Studies from Brandeis University. His areas of study and expertise include Political Islam, Salafism, Transnational and Revivalist Movements, Terrorism, US-Arab Relations, Arab-Israeli Conflict, U.S.-Muslim Relations, and Contemporary Middle East Politics. He is the author of dozens of articles in major academic and professional journals and magazines. His books have been peer-reviewed and highly commended. Dr. Rabil served as the Chief of Emergency for the Red Cross in Baabda district, Beirut during Lebanon’s civil war, and was project manager of the US State Department-funded Iraq Research and Documentation Project. Dr. Rabil was awarded the LLS Distinguished Professorship in Current Events (2012-2013; 2018-2019), LLS Teaching in Excellence Award, and in May 2012 was conferred an honorary Doctorate in Humanities from Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts.

Related Articles

The Power of Anti-Zionism in the United States: A Gradual Hegemony Building

Building on Antonio Gramsci’s framework, this paper analyzes the hegemonic
consolidation that has led to the emergence of a strong anti-Zionist historic bloc.
It reinterprets the notion of a historic bloc not through the traditional Marxist
perspective of class hegemony, but rather through the prevalence of a resolute
Palestinian narrative.

When Academic Freedom Becomes Weaponised: The Normalisation of Antisemitic Expression in British Academia

Amira Halperin and Stephen Sussman argue that institutional neutrality within universities can function as a mechanism of avoidance, and how legal protections for speech are being invoked to justify inaction.

In the wake of the 7 October 2023 Hamas attacks against Israel, university campuses across Britain have become sites of intense conflict over Israel, Gaza, Zionism, and antisemitism. Campus protests and confrontations have raised difficult questions about the boundaries between protected political expression and conduct that intimidates, excludes, or discriminates against Jewish and Israeli students and faculty.

The Strait of Hormuz Crisis and the Limits of Iranian Coercion

With the 60-day U.S.-Iran negotiating period now expired and the two sides still far apart, the Strait of Hormuz remains at the center of the confrontation. Traffic through one of the world’s most important energy corridors remains a fraction of prewar levels, while Washington and Tehran continue to disagree fundamentally over the terms under which normal navigation would resume. The immediate dispute raises a larger strategic question: can Tehran use control over a critical international waterway to compel a change in American strategy?

[fts_twitter twitter_name=@pbdemocracy tweets_count=6 cover_photo=yes stats_bar=no show_retweets=no show_replies=no]

The Center is a gathering of scholars, experts and community stakeholders, that engage in research and dialogue in an effort to create practical policy recommendations and solutions to current local, national, and international challenges.

©2025 The Palm Beach Center for Democracy and Policy Research. All Rights Reserved