The Iranian community in Los Angeles is grappling with the emotional aftermath of Israel’s unprecedented military attack on Iran that began on June 13, 2023. Over the following 12 days of conflict, airstrikes led to the loss of many lives, sparking international fears of further escalation in the volatile region.
As Israel’s bombings mounted, the United States quickly joined in with airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, complicating the already fragile geopolitical landscape. The cumulative impact of these events has revived haunting memories of past conflicts, particularly the war in Iraq that resulted in significant civilian casualties.
According to reports from The Seattle Times, the death toll from the conflict has already exceeded 1,060, predominantly consisting of civilian victims. Niki O, an Iranian American from Los Angeles, expressed the profound dread she experienced during the attacks.
“The 12 days of the war were extremely difficult for me,” she said. “Every night, I went to bed afraid of what escalation would take place while I slept, and each morning, I woke up to a debilitating anxiety, fearful of checking my phone.”
Pouneh Behin, another member of the Iranian diaspora, echoed similar sentiments, sharing her emotional struggle knowing family members were at risk. “When the bombings were happening, I was really not okay emotionally and mentally. There was intense fear of Israel demolishing entire regions, which led to a fear for my family’s safety,” she stated.
Israel’s longstanding animosity towards Iran is rooted in a complex historical context. Iran, as a regional power and one of the few Middle Eastern nations opposing ties with the Zionist state, stands as a significant challenge to Israeli interests, especially due to its support for Palestinian resistance.
Amid the conflict, many voices within the Iranian diaspora have become vocal in expressing their views on the situation. A number of these voices, particularly those that align with Zionist and anti-Islamic Republic sentiments, promote support for Israel and condemn the Iranian government, often romanticizing the reign of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, Iran’s king before the 1979 revolution.
However, Behin highlighted that the Zionist Iranian community represents a minority perspective within a broader Iranian collective. “Historically, many leftist Iranians have collaborated with Palestinian freedom fighters, viewing their struggles as interconnected against Western imperialism,” she commented.
Eden, another Iranian American from Los Angeles, pointed out a growing discourse on social media regarding Iran’s geopolitical plight. “It is odd to see Iranians in the diaspora advocating for more violence against Iran while disregarding the civilians that will suffer,” she remarked.
As Israel’s military actions continue, the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran weighs heavily on Israeli strategy. The potential for Iranian nuclear capabilities threatens Israel’s military dominance and would likely empower resistance groups supported by Iran, such as Hezbollah, the Houthis, and various Palestinian factions.
“Over decades, there has been an interest in destabilizing the region, with oil and gas resources as key incentives driving Western involvement,” stated Eden.
Behin suggested that for Israel, the goal is clear: to maintain control over the region by preventing Iranian sovereignty and self-determination. The looming prospect of an empowered Iran poses a dilemma for the status quo of the Middle Eastern geopolitical balance.
Despite the gravity of the situation, coverage of the conflict in Western media has largely reflected one-sided narratives that favor Israeli perspectives. Niki O criticized the mainstream media’s tendency to portray Israel as a victim, arguing that such portrayals legitimize ongoing violence against the Iranian populace.
Tuition for the events leading up to the attack includes long-standing animosity rooted in the history of U.S.-Iran relations, specifically following the U.S. actions during the 1953 coup that brought the Shah to power. This history plays a role in shaping contemporary perceptions.
Behin pointed out that the demonization of Iranians has historical roots extending back to the 1980 hostage crisis, during which media portrayal of Iran painted the nation as a significant threat, instilling fear in the American public.
Despite Iran’s commitments to halt its nuclear program under previous accords, fears surrounding Iran’s aspirations for nuclear capabilities continue to spark worries in the West. The stark contrast between Iran’s signatory status of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) compared to Israel’s refusal to disclose its nuclear weapons stockpile remains a point of contention in international discussions.
Amid all of this turmoil, Behin emphasized that promoting dialogue and understanding is crucial. “Iranians in the diaspora must advocate for policies that cease aggressive actions against Iran, support voices from within the country, and work to alleviate the consequences of sanctions that affect the Iranian people,” she stated.
As the ceasefire takes hold, many within the Iranian community reflect on the broader implications of the war. The emergence of a resilient voice from within Iran, coupled with the solidarity of the diaspora, may serve as a catalyst for future change in both domestic and international contexts.
In conclusion, the responsibilities of those in the diaspora extend beyond mere transnational dialogue. The need to uplift Iranian voices, advocate against aggressive policies, and foster solidarity remains critical as the community navigates through this turbulent time in its history.
image source from：knock-la
