Having neutralized key leaders of Iran’s proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, Israel appears to be preparing its long-anticipated retaliation against the Islamic Republic itself. Although currently limiting attacks to military assets, many are still demanding that Israel show “restraint,” warning against “escalation” with Iran and its terrorist proxies, who have promised revenge, leaving many worried that Iran will attempt something drastic. Israel, however, appears to be ignoring Western leaders’ demands––as they should. Calls for “ceasefire” or similar restraint might appeal to Western sensibilities, but they reveal a profound misunderstanding of the cultural dynamics at play between Israel and Iran. This dangerous cultural imperialism will not only fail to bring peace but could provoke Iran to escalate and expand its terrorist activities.
Unlike the modern West, which is rooted in a “dignity culture” emphasizing human beings’ innate worth, Iran, like much of the Middle East, has a culture of honor, where survival depends on being perceived as a formidable opponent. We see this play out when Iran and its proxies engage in honor killings and long-standing blood feuds — such as the ongoing tension between Palestinian Arabs and Jews. Whereas these types of behaviors are nearly incomprehensible to dignity-minded Westerners, honor cultures take an “at all costs” approach to conflict and view concepts like proportionality or surrender as weakness. Winning takes precedence over the preservation of humanity, a sentiment exemplified by the late Yahya Sinwar, who, when asked about the potential consequences of attacking Israel, described 100,000 innocent Gazans’ deaths as “worth it.”
Israel has long understood this cultural reality and has responded accordingly, exemplified by their “de-escalation through escalation” strategy currently employed against Hezbollah and Hamas. Prior to October 7th, this approach of consistent, swift and brutal retaliation had earned Israel respect within the region, paving the way for normalization with former adversaries through efforts like the Abraham Accords and even talks with Saudi Arabia. Even after October 7th, honor-based strategies have still proven effective, with Israel decimating the leadership of both Hezbollah and Hamas, including not only Sinwar, but his fellow terrorists and Iranian proxies, Ismail Haniyeh and Hassan Nasrallah, all of whom had evaded capture for decades, thereby proving Israel’s toughness and correspondingly earning its neighbors’ (admittedly quiet) respect. Indeed, Israel’s continuing to use honor-based strategies will likely have a similar normalization effect as the nation’s victories in the Yom Kippur war and similar previous engagements have done.
Although Western leaders praise the outcomes of Israel’s honor-based strategies, they continuously against “escalation” and demand “proportionality” in response to constant missile barrages, mass shootings, and threats of annihilation. Western leaders treat the term “ceasefire” like a panacea, ignoring that Hamas broke a ceasefire on October 7th, 2023. Western politicians even demanded Israel not enter Rafah, claiming it wasn’t worth the cost, only for Israel to discover that Hamas had hidden hostages there, and that Yahya Sinwar, the architect of October 7th, was hiding there to escape justice.
By insisting that Israel establish peace on dignity-based terms, Western leaders are embracing a delusion Iran holds a western view on human dignity. But Iran is very different from the Western armies who called for a Christmas truce in December, 1914. Iran is not waging a war of dignity, but of honor and blood.
Iran views Israel’s very existence as an insult that demands retaliation, making reasoning with Iran and its proxies impossible. Similarly, Iranian proxies like Hamas routinely break the rules of war, including willingly sacrificing their own civilians. In an honor logic, civilians’ lives are worth the cost of avenging the “insult” of Israel’s existence. Such casual disregard for life is alien to a culture of dignity. From the perspective of Western leaders, Israel’s tactics — such as mass pager detonations and aerial bombardment of terrorists embedded in former hospitals or schools — seem excessive and vengeful.
Were Israel’s enemies open to negotiating peace, they would have “had enough” several bombardments ago. Instead, even as their leaders dropping like flies, Iran and its proxy groups continue to attack Israel, refuse to release the remaining hostages, and promise to continue hostilities.
This lack of cultural literacy has implications beyond alienating allies. Western leaders’ insistence on applying dignity norms in honor contexts signals that America is weak and vulnerable to exploitation. This has been seen in Iran not only fomenting social unrest in the U.S. through funding anti-Israel protests, but even planning to assassinate incumbent President Trump and his aides. If Western Leaders continue ignoring the honor-based realities at work here, the West’s political credibility will not be the only casualty.
With both Hamas and Hezbollah crippled, there is an opportunity for peace in the Middle East that Western leaders should help facilitate. This cannot be done if the West remains blinded by cultural imperialism, insisting on restraint and compromise when strength is needed. Western leaders must allow Israel to respond forcefully to Iran, rather than advocating for premature ceasefires that only embolden Israel’s enemies.
Ending conflict in the Middle East requires recognizing that in honor cultures, any lasting peace must be built on strength and toughness. To facilitate this peace, Western leaders–––including both the current and incoming American presidential administrations–––must prioritize an approach that effectively navigates the cultural landscape of the region, rather than trying to force their own culturally-derived perspectives on “ceasefires” or “escalation.” Otherwise, this conflict will only intensify, and Israel will not be the only democracy to suffer.
Dr. Aaron Pomerantz is a social psychologist and postdoctoral research fellow at Rice University's Doerr Institute for New Leaders, where he studies destructive leadership and strategies for developing more ethical and effective leaders.
