Note: When the Leader of the Islamic Republic Condemns Himself

Ayatollah Khamenei recently made significant "confessions" in front of military and state officials, from which three conclusions can be drawn: First, he has condemned himself more than anyone else. Second, he has indicated clues for increasing pressure on the Islamic Republic. Third, he is experiencing confusion in presenting correct analysis and guidance. In his latest speech, he reiterated his usual accusations against America as a country that is untrustworthy and "cannot be relied upon," emphasizing that America's enmity towards the Islamic Republic is "deep enmity." He stated: "Flexibility in the face of this enemy - due to seasonal considerations that we sometimes have - will not dull the edge of their enmity, but rather will make them bolder... wherever we have slightly backed down, they have come at us more aggressively." If one pays a little attention, the introduction describing America as an untrustworthy country that should not be yielded to and this confession that sometimes the Islamic Republic has shown "seasonal considerations" that have made America "bolder" are in complete contradiction with each other. Undoubtedly, one of these seasonal considerations or, as he puts it, "flexibility in front of the enemy" should be considered the command of heroic flexibility. It is no secret that if it were not for this command as an opening at the beginning of nuclear negotiations, the JCPOA would not have been achieved at all. His command of flexibility (or softness) was the conclusion of an agreement that, good or bad, we know as the JCPOA. Now, if this consideration has sharpened America's enmity and made it bolder to the point that America has now exited the JCPOA and its Secretary of State has set twelve conditions, why did Khamenei issue such a command? Did he not understand the essence of America? If he claims he did not know America, this claim contradicts years of lessons in "enemy recognition." In this same speech, he listed a long list of America's hostilities. He said: "You will not find any type of opposition that they [America] have not carried out against the Islamic Republic; they organized a military coup, incited ethnicities, provoked Saddam to war with Iran; during the war, they supported him in various ways, imposed sanctions; they influenced against us in the UN; they conducted round-the-clock propaganda; they used art; they used Hollywood..." He then concludes that "the goal of all these actions was overthrowing." Now, if he was aware of all of America's enmities motivated by the overthrow of the Islamic Republic and knew that flexibility [read: heroic flexibility] would make America bolder, why did he resort to such "seasonal consideration"? Was the implication of this seasonal consideration not that pure Muhammadan Islam (!) was willing to negotiate with the Great Satan (!) ? Interestingly, he reminds his audience of a clear example. He says: "That wicked president [George W. Bush] named Iran the axis of evil in response to the flexibilities shown by the then government [Khatami] because flexibilities had been shown to him." With this example, the question that prompts the audience to reflect is that if he had such behavior from America in mind, why did he issue the command of heroic flexibility in the nuclear case? Is it not the case that with this statement he condemns himself that if you knew America's behavior, why did you open the way for negotiations with America? Another example of Khamenei's "self-condemnation" in this speech is when he claims that hostilities against the Islamic Republic are not limited to America. He says: "This is certainly not specific to America; the West is generally like this. We do not forget that at one time our president [Rafsanjani], who was in favor of flexibility towards the West, was summoned to court by a Western government [Germany] in the Mykonos affair... These are so brazen and shameless; let us remember that the way to prevent enmity from these enemies is not retreat and flexibility and the like." If it is the case that one should not retreat before enemies, why does he currently keep the door open for negotiations about the "European JCPOA"? If he sees Europeans as "brazen" and "shameless" like America, why does he still keep the way of flexibility and softness open in the European JCPOA? Did he not say that "the way to prevent enmity from these enemies is not retreat and flexibility and the like?" Why does he not issue a command of heroic firmness? The pressure path that Khamenei indicates, regardless of the clear contradictions in the words of the leader of the Islamic Republic, is that he openly expresses the way to increase pressure on the Islamic Republic. He says: "America easily undermines this international treaty [the JCPOA], they go back on their signature. We protested against many of these sanctions they created, but we did not take any strong practical action. Now you see that the President of America and his Secretary of State come boldly and shamelessly to demand." There is no clearer statement than this that Ali Khamenei depicts himself as lacking deterrent tools against America. He has clearly articulated the path of America's pressure on his regime. He says: "If you want to do something so that America does not act hostile, very well, find the way." But he does not propose any way. He no longer anticipates sanctions. He no longer sees sanctions as a blessing. He no longer sees a solution in circumventing sanctions. He no longer instills the hope that the Islamic Republic is in a state of power and authority like in the Battle of Badr and Khaybar. With all these hard confessions made by the leader of the Islamic Republic, he lowers the level of discourse with his audience, all of whom are high-ranking state and military officials, to the extent that by likening America to the cartoon character "Tom" in the cartoon Tom and Jerry, he says that "all" of America's actions in these 40 years have "failed" and like the "famous cat in the story of Tom and Jerry, it will fail again." Conclusion: As explained, it becomes clear from just one speech of Khamenei that he is severely confused and has lost logical coherence in his analyses and guidance. As a result, he sometimes presents extremely contradictory statements that condemn himself the most. In this speech, he refers to three governments, Rafsanjani, Khatami, and Rouhani, as examples of periods in which the Islamic Republic showed flexibility and softness towards its enemy but received the opposite result. His statement suggests that these governments made a miscalculation against the enemy and submitted to flexibility, while it seems he has forgotten that throughout all these periods, he has been at the head of the regime with absolute powers and in the last case, he himself issued the command of "heroic flexibility."