From Saddam Hussein to Israel: How Iran's wars have divided a nation

Jerusalem Post | Alex Winston

Iran faced a profound test of national cohesion during the 1980-88 war when Saddam Hussein's ground invasion inadvertently united a fractured populace behind the fledgling Islamic Republic despite domestic grievances. That historical rallying effect contrasts sharply with the recent 2025 and 2026 aerial military campaigns conducted by the United States and Israel, which targeted nuclear and military infrastructure rather than occupying territory.

Following decades of economic deterioration and violent crackdowns on domestic protests, segments of the Iranian population responded not with nationalist fervor in defense of the regime, but by openly expressing gratitude toward foreign leaders. Officials like Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei faced public opprobrium, including being booed in Tehran, exposing the severe fractures separating the clerical establishment from its citizenry. While state leaders continue to proclaim ironclad unity, the widening chasm demonstrates how external conflict now exacerbates domestic vulnerabilities rather than cementing regime survival.

Comment

Aerial bombing campaigns against fixed assets like nuclear facilities and command nodes leave air defence networks and internal security apparatuses structurally intact, changing the calculus of domestic resistance. When the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps deploys provincial security forces to suppress internal dissent while simultaneously absorbing precision strikes, the regime relies on coercion rather than genuine popular mobilization. This dynamic differs fundamentally from the attritional land warfare seen during the Shatt al-Arab engagements, where territorial defense demanded broad societal participation. Consequently, the Islamic Republic's internal security architecture remains brittle even as state media projects outward resilience.

Strategic Question for Discussion

What happens to internal security enforcement when precision aerial campaigns bypass ground forces to target regime command nodes directly?

The pattern suggests that elite security units must choose between defending external infrastructure and suppressing domestic unrest, stretching internal control thin. This trade-off points to a structural vulnerability within centralized command hierarchies that cannot easily be resolved by ideological proclamations alone.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

To read in details click here