<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div dir="ltr">
<h1 class="gmail-news-title-container"> From 1980 to 2025:
West-backed imposed wars against Iran end same way \u2013 in defeat </h1>
<div class="gmail-news-detail-top">
<div class="gmail-news-detail">Monday, 22 September 2025 -<font
size="1"> <a
href="https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/09/21/755438/from-1980-2025-imposed-wars-iran-end-same-way-defeat"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/09/21/755438/from-1980-2025-imposed-wars-iran-end-same-way-defeat</a></font></div>
<div class="gmail-news-detail"><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail-news-body-container">
<div class="gmail-news-attachment-container">
<div id="gmail-mediaplayer"> <img id="gmail-imgPlayback"
class="gmail-news-attachment"
src="https://cdn.presstv.ir/Photo/2025/9/22/78fa707e-6017-4e7d-ad85-5f95aa7a1034.jpg"
alt="" width="418" height="234" style="margin-right: 0px;"
moz-do-not-send="true"> </div>
</div>
<div class="gmail-col-md-9"
style="text-align:justify;padding-left:10px">
<p><br>
<strong>By Ivan Kesic</strong></p>
<p><strong>Today marks the forty-fifth anniversary of the
outbreak of the Imposed War, an eight-year war of
aggression launched by Saddam Hussein's Ba'athist regime
against the Islamic Republic of Iran that would become one
of the longest conventional wars of the twentieth century.</strong></p>
<p>The invasion, launched on September 21, 1980, represented a
profound test for the nascent Islamic Republic, which was
still consolidating its revolutionary gains and faced
significant internal challenges.</p>
<p>Despite being caught unprepared and subjected to
simultaneous land, air, and naval attacks across its western
and southern borders, Iran mounted a commendably brave and
resilient defense that ultimately repelled the aggressor and
preserved the country's territorial integrity and
sovereignty.</p>
<p>The aggression cannot be understood in isolation from its
international context, as it was actively encouraged and
supported by foreign powers, particularly the United States,
which provided critical political backing, intelligence, and
weaponry to Baghdad throughout the protracted war.</p>
<p>European countries likewise played a significant role in
fueling the war of aggression through massive arms
shipments, including the provision of chemical weapons that
were deployed against Iranian soldiers and civilians in
violation of international norms.</p>
<p>The parallels between this aggression and the more recent
one, particularly the 12-day imposed war by the Israeli
regime in June, reveal enduring patterns of foreign
hostility and interventionism against Iran, met consistently
with national unity and determined resistance.</p>
<p><strong>Outset of aggression and Iran's response</strong></p>
<p>The war began with a series of coordinated airstrikes on
September 21, 1980, as Iraqi MiG fighter jets bombed
multiple Iranian airports, including Mehrabad in Tehran,
Ahvaz, Tabriz, Hamadan, and Bushehr, targeting both military
infrastructure and civilian facilities in a clear escalation
of hostilities.</p>
<p>These attacks were accompanied by a full-scale ground
invasion across Iran's western and southern borders, with
Iraqi forces advancing into the oil-rich province of
Khuzestan under the delusion that local Arabic-speaking
populations would welcome them as liberators rather than
defend their territory.</p>
<p>This strategic miscalculation reflected the flawed
assumptions of Saddam Hussein's regime, which believed the
political turmoil following Iran's Islamic Revolution had
created a window of vulnerability that could be exploited
for quick territorial gains and geopolitical advantage.</p>
<p>The invasion was preceded by Saddam's theatrical tearing of
the Algiers Agreement before television cameras, claiming
absolute Iraqi sovereignty over the Arvand River and even
Iranian islands in the Persian Gulf, to fabricate a pretext
for aggression that lacked any legal or historical
foundation.</p>
<p>Iran's armed forces, still in a period of reorganization
following the Islamic Revolution and facing various internal
challenges, demonstrated remarkable composure and resilience
in responding to these unprovoked attacks, quickly
mobilized to defend the country's sovereignty despite the
element of surprise and the superior weaponry initially
fielded by the invading forces.</p>
<div style="text-align:center">
<img alt="" height="313"
src="https://cdn.presstv.ir/Photo/2025/9/21/bb4ba081-2290-4193-b3c0-a2469247f02c.jpg"
width="418" style="margin-right: 25px;"
moz-do-not-send="true">
<em>Bombing of the civilian neighborhood of Ekbatan in
Tehran on the first day of the aggression</em>
</div>
<p>The immediate response included the shooting down of eleven
Iraqi aircraft and the sinking of four missile frigates,
according to early military announcements, showcasing the
operational capability and determination of Iranian forces
even under unexpectedly adverse conditions.</p>
<p>The national response to the invasion was characterized by
extraordinary unity and resolve, as political leaders across
the spectrum and ordinary citizens alike rallied to defend
the country against external aggression, setting aside
differences in the face of a common threat.</p>
<p>Imam Khomeini, in a message delivered shortly after the
attacks began, firmly condemned the aggression while drawing
a clear distinction between the Iraqi regime and its people,
emphasizing that Iran's response would target the architects
of the invasion rather than the Iraqi population, who were
themselves victims of Saddam's tyranny.</p>
<p>All senior Iranian government officials at the time urged
calm and discipline while highlighting the coordinated
response of military and political institutions,
demonstrating a cohesive national leadership that
effectively managed the crisis despite the challenging
circumstances.</p>
<p>Perhaps most significantly, ordinary Iranians from all
walks of life spontaneously expressed their readiness to
join the defense effort, with many rushing to offer
assistance at bombed sites despite safety concerns and
others formally volunteering for military service,
reflecting a profound popular commitment to national defense
that would become a defining feature of the war years.</p>
<p>The heroic resistance in border cities such as
Khorramshahr, where lightly armed defenders held off
numerically superior Iraqi forces for weeks, became
emblematic of Iran's determined response to aggression and
demonstrated that technological superiority alone could not
overcome national resolve and strategic ingenuity.</p>
<p>The period of Imposed War served to clearly distinguish
genuine patriots who set aside their differences to unite in
defense of the nation from those who chose to abandon the
country, such as monarchists who sought refuge abroad, and
members of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO) terror
cult, who aligned themselves with the invading forces.</p>
<p><strong>Western support for Ba'athist Iraqi aggression</strong></p>
<p>The Imposed War cannot be properly understood without
examining the extensive international support provided to
the Saddam regime, particularly from Western powers that saw
the Iraqi aggression as an opportunity to weaken the Islamic
Republic and roll back its growing influence.</p>
<p>The United States played a particularly instrumental role
in facilitating Iraqi aggression, having given what amounted
to a green light for the invasion following the collapse of
diplomatic negotiations in Bonn just days before the attacks
commenced, where Iranian attempts to resolve outstanding
issues, including frozen assets, had been rebuffed by
American officials.</p>
<p>This timing was hardly coincidental, coming just two months
after the failure of the Nojeh coup plot\u2014a joint
American-Iraqi attempt to overthrow the Iranian
government\u2014which demonstrated that military action against
Iran had been actively contemplated by both regimes before
the September invasion.</p>
<div>
<div class="gmail-oembed"><a
href="https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/04/29/747098/Iran-urges-German-probe-of-chemical-weapons-supply-to-Iraq"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><img
alt="Iran urges Germany to probe wartime supply of chemical weapons to Iraq"
class="gmail-thumbnail"
src="https://cdn.presstv.ir/Photo/2025/4/29/15ea4bd7-3f42-44c8-88d7-d252200c1a20.jpg"
width="418" height="236" style="margin-right: 0px;"
moz-do-not-send="true"></a>
<div class="gmail-title"><a
href="https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/04/29/747098/Iran-urges-German-probe-of-chemical-weapons-supply-to-Iraq"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Iran urges
Germany to probe wartime supply of chemical weapons to
Iraq</a></div>
</div>
<a
href="https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/04/29/747098/Iran-urges-German-probe-of-chemical-weapons-supply-to-Iraq"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Iran has called for
full accountability for the use of chemical weapons during
the Iran-Iraq War, urging Germany to investigate and
reveal the truth about its role in arming Iraq with the
destructive weapons.</a></div>
<p>Once the war commenced, the US provided extensive material
support to Iraq, including intelligence sharing, economic
assistance amounting to billions of dollars, and direct
military training, while simultaneously engaging in sabotage
operations against Iranian infrastructure and participating
in attacks on Iranian shipping and oil platforms.</p>
<p>American diplomatic efforts further aided the Iraqi war
machine by systematically deflecting attention from
Baghdad's use of chemical weapons through false
equivalencies that misleadingly suggested both sides were
employing such prohibited weapons, when in reality only Iraq
possessed and utilized these horrific instruments of warfare
against both military targets and civilian populations.</p>
<p>European powers similarly bear significant responsibility
for enabling and prolonging the aggression through their
extensive arms exports to Iraq, which transformed Saddam's
military into a formidable force equipped with the most
advanced weaponry available on the international market.</p>
<p>France emerged as one of Iraq's primary weapons suppliers,
providing aircraft, missile systems, and armored vehicles
that significantly enhanced Baghdad's offensive
capabilities, while Germany contributed dual-use technology
and chemical precursors that facilitated the development of
Iraq's chemical weapons program despite international
prohibitions.</p>
<p>The United Kingdom likewise authorized extensive arms sales
to Baghdad while providing technical assistance and training
that improved the effectiveness of Iraqi forces, and Italy
furnished naval vessels and other military hardware that
strengthened Iraq's strategic position.</p>
<p>This massive international arms pipeline allowed Iraq to
sustain its war effort despite significant losses and
economic challenges, effectively outsourcing its military
logistics to foreign suppliers who profited handsomely from
the prolonged aggression while paying lip service to calls
for peace and neutrality.</p>
<p>The coordinated nature of this support suggests a
deliberate Western strategy to use Iraq as a proxy to weaken
Iran, reflecting geopolitical calculations that prioritized
containing the Islamic Revolution over regional stability or
humanitarian considerations.</p>
<p><strong>parallels with June 2025 Imposed War</strong></p>
<p>The patterns of external aggression and Iranian resilience
evident during the 1980s Imposed War found striking
parallels in the 12-day war imposed by the Israeli regime in
coordination with the US in June this year, which similarly
combined surprise attacks, foreign backing, and ultimately
failed to achieve its strategic objectives due to Iran's
determined response.</p>
<p>Like Saddam's invasion in 1980, the Israeli aggression
began with targeted assassinations of top-ranking military
commanders and scientists alongside attacks on civilian
areas, reflecting a similar calculation that Iran could be
weakened through decapitation strikes and shock tactics.</p>
<p>The United States again played an enabling role, directly
participating in bombing campaigns against Iranian nuclear
facilities despite the absence of any legitimate
justification.</p>
<div>
</div>
<p>European powers, meanwhile, offered political cover for the
aggression through muted responses and statements that
failed to unequivocally condemn the violation of Iranian
sovereignty, echoing their permissive stance during the
earlier Imposed War despite the passage of decades and
purported advances in international law and war prevention
mechanisms.</p>
<p>Iran's response to the 2025 aggression demonstrated the
same national unity and military competence that had
characterized its defense during the 1980s, with armed
forces effectively responding to attacks on multiple fronts
and delivering measured but decisive counterstrikes against
targets in occupied territories and American bases in the
region.</p>
<p>The leadership similarly maintained a clear strategic
direction throughout the crisis, with Leader of the Islamic
Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei emphasizing the
nation's resolve and capability while accurately identifying
the motivations underlying the hostility toward Iran's
independent path.</p>
<p>Most significantly, both aggressions ultimately concluded
without achieving the aggressors' primary objectives\u2014whether
the territorial gains sought by Iraq or the destruction of
Iran's nuclear program and defensive capabilities attempted
by the Israeli regime\u2014demonstrating the consistent failure
of military coercion against a nation determined to defend
its sovereignty and principles.</p>
<p>The continuity between these episodes, separated by
45 years, suggests enduring structural factors in Iran's
international relations, where foreign powers repeatedly
underestimate national unity and resilience while
overestimating the effectiveness of military force against a
people who have consistently demonstrated their willingness
to sacrifice in defense of their country and revolution.</p>
<p>These parallel experiences have inevitably shaped Iran's
strategic calculus and defense preparedness, reinforcing the
importance of military self-sufficiency and the development
of deterrent capabilities that can discourage future
aggression while ensuring an effective response if
aggression is nevertheless imposed.</p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>