By Nasser Kandil
Every ideological revolution embodying a dimension transcendent of nationalistic boundaries faces the dilemma of finding the response to the question of how to move beyond its particularity to expand internationally. That is what the Bolshevik Revolution faced after its success in Russia, resulting in schisms in its leadership, and the exit of one of its biggest leaders, Leon Trotsky, who accused Joseph Stalin of giving predominance to Russian national interests while eschewing the international concept of the Communist Revolution which calls for perseverance in confronting Imperialism, and calling for the permanent revolution. Trotsky later accused the official Soviet leadership of deviation and sharing influence with the West at the expense of the revolutionary concept. While the Chinese Revolution in the time of Mao Tse Tung tried to solve this dilemma through support of Indo-China revolutions, in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. However, despite the spread of what became known as Maoism in the 70’s of the last century, this wave receded because these revolutions, after their success, took on a different course from the Chinese one.
Venezuela, under Hugo Chavez, attempted to build a revolutionary climate founded on Simon Bolivar’s heritage, and launched an ebbing and flowing revolutionary wave in Latin America influenced by the state of advancement and retreat of revolutionary winds. After the success of the revolution, Cuba was successful in presenting a revolutionary paradigm which continued to inspire revolutionaries around world through the personality of the leader Ernesto Che Guevara, who forsook power in Cuba to organize and support revolutions in Latin America until his martyrdom.
The West dealt with the concept of international ideological revolutions transcending nationalistic borders by the accusation of “revolution export”, implying building a foreign influence in other countries by a nation formed through a revolution. Iran continues to suffer from being accused of the attempt of transferring “Khomeinism”, a prototype particular to Iran, to countries with different particularities. Such accusations on some occasions have taken the form of the imposition of the Shia school of faith, on other occasions as Iran supporting resistance movements on a sectarian basis to build a Shia crescent representative of its influence in the region, and on numerous other occasions accusing the resistance movements aligned with Iran as executing an Iranian project, and serving through its battles, Iranian negotiation needs. Such claims were raised frequently in the face of Al- Mukawama Al-Islamiyah (Islamic Resistance) in Lebanon, particularly of timing its battles to serve Iran in the Nuclear Agreement negotiations, accusations which Al-Mukawama forces continue to face under this headline from Lebanon, to Iraq, Yemen, and Palestine.
The Western and Arab Worlds, along with the Occupation’s Government collectively acknowledge Iran’s success in building a different paradigm capable of surviving the transcendence of borders which impeded other ideological revolutions. Without doubt such success was achieved because Iran studied well the experiments of others, and after the success of the Iranian Revolution, studied the results of many revolution-related experimental trials, and after weighty consideration decided on an ideological and creative triad consisting of
Al-Mukawama (Resistance), Al-Quds (Jerusalem), and exceptional leadership in Suleimani.
In deciding on this triad, Al-Mukawama in Lebanon presented Iran with a model embodying credibility of the Cause, namely the struggle against the Occupation, and its attractiveness, presence, and reach. The inspirational motto of Al-Imam Al-Khomeini, the initiator and leader of the Iranian revolution, “Today Iran and tomorrow Palestine,” inspired the translation of the motto’s content into its international attribute, making the Palestinian Cause and Al-Quds in all its symbolism a headline for its internationalism. The proclamation of the Al-Quds International Day thus became the first translation of the motto, and its application became proof of the theory’s success. The Iranian Leadership also succeeded in choosing the elite of its ideological, jihadist, and humanistic leaders as the third component of this triad. General Kassem Suleimani, assigned as the Head of Al-Quds Corps, was with his talents, ethics, deep consciousness of history and humanism, the degree of his adherence to his ideological faith in a manner attractive, containing, and interactive, and his rare courage, military genius, and great readiness to sacrifice brought together this triad. Thus Al-Mukawama, Al-Quds, and Suleimani became the formula for the New Middle East challenging American dominance, and through it came the “Axis of Resistance” formula.
Credit goes to Suleimani for transforming the relationship between the forces of
Al-Mukawma (Resistance) in the region into an axis, despite the distinguished status of the leader of Al-Mukawama Al-Islamiya in Lebanon Al- Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah among the leaders of these Groups and their popular support substructures, and with Suleimani himself. The Axis was in need of a field leader able to move between its arenas, respond to its needs, and to present a brilliant model of devotion, ethics, humility, knowledge, experience, honesty, and courage. Such attributes in both Suleimani and Al-Sayyed Nasrallah, and their contributions became a reflection of the Leader of the Iranian Revolution, Imam Khomeini’s, and its Guide, Imam Khamenei’s, attributes and what they represent.
Suleimani succeeded with distinction in such challenges, and was loved by the Lebanese, Syrians, Iraqis, Yemenis, Afghanis, and Pakistanis. He succeeded in transcending sectarian and ideological divisions, and was open to all Resistance currents, movements, and forces. He wove alliances with Russia which transformed into coordination built on exceptional trust from President Vladimir Putin, and reached a stage in which Putin asked his military command, every time a proposal related to the war in Syria was presented to him, “What did Suleimani say?” Suleimani’s influence and concern also reached Venezuela, transforming into a reality
Imam Khomeini’s concept of the “Disempowered Front.”
In his last years, Suleimani’s numerous and complicated successes translated into victories for Al-Mukawama Axis in Syria and Iraq, represented by the end of “Daesh” as an organization. He was a partner in creating the victory over the world war which targeted Syria. His fingerprints were evident in the deterrence equation set by Al-Mukawama in Palestine embodied in the battle of “Saif Al-Quds” (Sword of Jerusalem). He was the Unknown Soldier, and the known one, behind the Lebanese Mukawama’s precision missiles, and the growth of Ansar Allah’s capabilities in Yemen to the point of holding the security of the Gulf in their grasp. He drew the end of the American dominance in the region, and placed Occupation in an existential dilemma. His assassination uncovered the magnitude of the emotional tide stored in the hearts of the ones who loved him inside and outside Iran, thereby creating an additional shield of deterrence protecting Iran and supporting her strength, unifying Al-Mukawama Groups, and uplifting the importance of the Axis they form.