Netanyahu's Visit to Oman and Zarif's Retreat from the 'Destruction of Israel' Rhetoric

A recent interview with Zarif, the Iranian Foreign Minister, contained a significant and surprising point that drew media attention. He completely denied the notion of 'destroying Israel,' a well-known slogan in the Islamic Republic, stating: 'When did we say we would destroy Israel? Just find one person who has said this. No one has said such a thing.' It is no secret that this statement is a new claim; there are dozens of reasons that contradict this assertion. For example, in the literature of the Islamic Republic, even the official name of Israel is avoided, and instead, terms like 'the occupying regime of Quds,' 'the Zionist regime,' 'a cancerous tumor,' and similar equivalents are used to refer to Israel. With such rhetoric, it is clear that no one is expected to allow a cancerous tumor that occupies the first Qibla of Muslims to live. Among the dozens, if not hundreds, of statements from official Iranian authorities, it suffices to mention that Ayatollah Khamenei stated on September 5, 2013: 'The great Imam was the one who did not shy away from stating that the Zionist regime is a cancerous tumor that must be eradicated.' Despite this background, the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic is now conveying a message to the world that contradicts the past: 'When did we say we would destroy Israel?' Interestingly, following this new stance from Zarif, there has been no dissenting voice from Tehran condemning or reprimanding him. Given this, has one of the oldest 'ideals of the Imam,' namely the effort to eliminate Israel, come to an end as the Islamic Republic approaches its 40th anniversary? From 'destroying' Israel to 'being destroyed' Despite the establishment of 'International Quds Day' and repetitive rhetoric against Israel, there are hidden yet solid evidences that the Islamic Republic's denial of Israel's existence is fading. According to undeniable evidence, the Islamic Republic is not only no longer denying Israel's existence but has recognized it within the 1967 borders on multiple occasions. (For further reading, refer to the article 'A Look at Iran's Position Regarding the Final Statement of the Istanbul Summit and Israel's Existence.') Given this, if the Islamic Republic has taken the first step of recognizing Israel—albeit quietly—why should it bear the cost of the slogan of destroying Israel? The second step after recognizing Israel is justifying the slogan of destroying Israel. In this context, a strategy has been devised to reduce the slogan of 'destroying' Israel to the slogan of 'being destroyed' by Israel. Thus, when it states that Israel will be erased from the scene of the world, it preserves its dignity and pretends not to have retreated from its previous positions while implying that it is not its duty to take this responsibility but rather a prediction of an event that will erase Israel from the world stage. This is a tactic that Zarif has resorted to, fundamentally denying the 40-year slogan of destroying Israel. However, more importantly, it should be noted that the first person to retreat from the slogan of 'destroying' Israel and reduce the regime's 40-year slogan to 'being destroyed' is Ayatollah Khamenei himself. This claim is substantiated as follows: Amid increasing international pressures on the Islamic Republic regarding the slogan of destroying Israel, Ali Khamenei, in August 2014, reduced the issue of destroying Israel to a 'referendum' that he believes would lead to the destruction of Israel. In a clear retreat, he stated: 'The destruction of the Zionist regime does not mean the massacre of its Jewish people. The ruling regime must be determined by a referendum and the choice of the people... Based on this mechanism, the people who live in this region and belong there will announce their desired government in a referendum, and through this, the usurping and fake regime will be eradicated.' His idea, although ridiculous, reveals the truth that the leader of the Islamic Republic has retreated from the slogan of destroying Israel—at least in rhetoric—just as he retreated from the refusal to negotiate with the U.S. (the Great Satan) under the slogan of 'heroic flexibility' in 2013. If we take Khamenei's 180-degree change of position as a criterion, it becomes clear why Zarif's new claim has not sparked a strong reaction within the country. In other words, it can be argued that the Islamic Republic—despite all the rhetoric such as Quds Day—is practically moving towards reducing sensitivity towards the denial of Israel's existence. This claim can be well observed in that in the early months of the Islamic Republic's existence, this fledgling regime, at the command of the founder of the Islamic Republic, severed its relations with Egypt due to its recognition of Israel based on the Camp David Accords, but now, in its 40th year of existence, it not only did not sever relations with Oman—Tehran's long-time friend—following Netanyahu's visit but also did not express any reproachful reaction. Is it not worth pondering that this regime has been cutting ties with Cairo for four decades in protest of Egypt's commitment to Camp David, yet now passes by the warm welcome of Sultan Qaboos to Netanyahu with 'meaningful silence'? Oman as a mediator between Iran and Israel? It is no secret that Oman, due to its good relations with Tehran, has always played a mediating role in important Iranian issues. The most notable example was the secret talks that took place in Oman between Tehran and Washington, with the approval of Ayatollah Khamenei, regarding the nuclear issue in late 2012. Almost all observers and experts commenting on Sultan Qaboos's unexpected hosting of Netanyahu (in October 2018) agreed that this visit, aside from normalizing Oman-Israel relations, also contained a message for Tehran. Therefore, when Yusuf bin Alawi, the Omani Foreign Minister, explicitly stated: 'Israel is a country present in this region... It is time to treat Israel like other countries,' many interpreted this statement as a message for Tehran to normalize relations with Israel. (Refer to 'Has Oman Become a Mediator for Iran and Israel?') The reality is that regardless of speculations, there is no strong evidence supporting this claim, but the fact that just two months after that meeting, Zarif has completely denied the 40-year slogan of destroying Israel cannot be without reason. Surely, if someone asks him what happened to the slogan of destroying Israel, he will refer to Khamenei's statements and claim that the Islamic Republic is not seeking to destroy Israel but that Israel will be erased through a fair referendum. Conclusion: Despite all that has been said, there is no strong evidence that Netanyahu sent a message to Tehran during his visit to Oman and that Zarif has denied the slogan of destroying Israel in a positive reaction to Netanyahu's message. Nevertheless, the following findings are undeniable: First: The Islamic Republic is more or less on the path to reducing sensitivity towards Israel. (Example: Lack of strong reaction against Oman following Netanyahu's visit) Second: The Islamic Republic, as acknowledged by Ali Khamenei himself, has retreated from the slogan of destroying Israel—at least in words. Third: The Islamic Republic has certainly abandoned the denial of Israel's existence and has recognized this country within the 1967 borders. Given these findings, should a connection not be found between Netanyahu's visit to Oman and Zarif's retreat from 'destroying Israel'?