Hypocrisy in the Kremlin: Putin's Hollow Plea for Restraint

 

Vladimir Putin's advice to Iran to avoid civilian casualties is laughable, given Russia's documented atrocities against civilians in Ukraine. Also, the international community must confront the reality of Iran's actions and adopt strategies that prioritize robust military and strategic support for Israel to ensure regional stability.

Isn't it the height of irony for Vladimir Putin to urge Iran to avoid civilian casualties in its response to Israel's actions? Putin, whose forces have been responsible for widespread civilian suffering in Ukraine, advising restraint to avoid civilian harm seems almost laughable. How can someone embroiled in the devastation of civilian areas in Ukraine – from schools to hospitals – dare to lecture another nation on the ethics of warfare?

Putin's record in Ukraine is glaringly inconsistent with his advice to Iran. Since the invasion began in February 2022, there have been numerous reports of Russian attacks on civilian infrastructure. For instance, in March 2022, a Russian airstrike on a maternity hospital in Mariupol resulted in the death of at least three people, including a child. More recently, in July  2024, a missile strike on an apartment building and children hospital in Kyiv killed at least 45 civilians, including children. These incidents are not isolated; they are part of a broader pattern of targeting civilian areas, which has drawn widespread international condemnation and allegations of war crimes.

Yet, in a striking display of hypocrisy, Putin dispatched Sergei Shoigu, his ally and former defense minister, to Tehran to urge restraint. Shoigu's message to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as reported, was to avoid civilian casualties in response to the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas. This call for moderation comes even as Russia intensifies its military campaign in Ukraine, inflicting severe civilian casualties daily. The juxtaposition of these actions highlights a glaring inconsistency in Russia's stance on the protection of civilians in conflict zones.

The response from Washington and other Western states to Iran's potential retaliation also raises questions. Efforts to persuade Iran to retaliate in a measured way seem almost naïve given Iran's historical responses to similar provocations. Tehran has openly declared its intent to respond severely to the killing of Haniyeh, underscoring the futility of diplomatic efforts. This situation echoes past instances where Iran has acted decisively against perceived threats or provocations, such as its support for Hezbollah in Lebanon or its involvement in conflicts in Syria and Yemen.

It is evident that the international community's approach to Iran needs reevaluation. The idea of persuading Iran to act with restraint while it continues to support groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, both designated as terrorist organizations by the United States and many other countries, seems disconnected from reality. These groups have consistently engaged in activities that destabilize the region and pose significant threats to Israel and other countries.

Given this context, the argument for a robust and unequivocal support of Israel in its struggle against Iranian-backed aggression becomes compelling. Just as the West has rallied to support Ukraine against Russian aggression, a similar approach should be adopted towards Israel. The support should not just be in the form of diplomatic efforts but also substantial military aid and strategic backing to ensure Israel can defend itself effectively against Iran's proxies.

Iran's transgressions extend beyond its immediate support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Its nuclear ambitions and ballistic missile program pose broader regional and global threats. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or the Iran nuclear deal, was an attempt to curb these ambitions, but its effectiveness has been widely debated. Since the United States withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, Iran has accelerated its nuclear program, bringing it closer to developing a nuclear weapon. This development adds another layer of urgency to addressing Iran's actions decisively.

Furthermore, Iran's human rights record and internal repression highlight its disregard for international norms and human dignity. The violent suppression of protests, such as the crackdown on demonstrations in 2019 which resulted in hundreds of deaths, reveals the regime's willingness to use lethal force against its own citizens. Supporting Iran's adversaries in the region, therefore, aligns with broader objectives of promoting stability and human rights.

While diplomatic efforts to de-escalate tensions in the Middle East are important, they must be grounded in a realistic assessment of the actors involved. Iran's history and actions suggest that it is unlikely to be swayed by calls for restraint, especially from those like Putin, whose actions speak louder than their words. The international community must recognize this reality and adjust its strategies accordingly.

Simply put, Putin, with his track record in Ukraine, has no moral authority to advise Iran on avoiding civilian casualties – in fact it is nothing short of a farce. It underscores the need for the West to adopt a more realistic and assertive stance towards Iran. By unequivocally supporting Israel, much like the support extended to Ukraine, the West can help ensure that Iran's transgressions are adequately addressed and that regional stability is maintained. As the saying goes, those living in glass houses should not throw stones – or in Putin's case, missiles.