The Peril of Humiliation as Politics

After the US attacked Iranian nuclear sites in late June 2025, President Trump announced: “Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and much easier. For 40 years, Iran has been saying, ‘Death to America, Death to Israel.’”

Trump proceeded with the attack despite a report from International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi, which stated there was no evidence of an active Iranian nuclear weapons program. The US strike, presented as the removal of an immediate existential threat, appeared instead to be an act of revenge for perceived humiliations by Iran since the 1979 Revolution.

Interestingly, the Iranian Revolution itself was also framed as a response to national humiliation by the United States. In the late 1970s, revolutionary discourse in Iran frequently invoked the term estekbar-e jahani (global arrogance) to describe the oppressive policies of Western powers toward Iran. The revolution was portrayed as a rebellion against imperial arrogance. Iranians revolted because they felt humiliated by an arrogant and overbearing United States. Humiliation has become the fuel for a recurring cycle of hostile geopolitics.

Certainly, there is a profound difference between being humiliated by chants of “Death to America” and being humiliated by 13,000 kg bombs.

Colonial history is packed with examples of this kind, where perceived humiliation to imperial dignity was used to justify overwhelming displays of force. In 1840, when China banned opium imports, Queen Victoria described the act as “an assault upon [her] personal dignity.” This perceived slight served as a justification for launching what would become known as the Century of Humiliation, a prolonged period of foreign domination of China. Both Queen Victoria and Trump forged a staged humiliation of their ‘Empire’ by the subordinated states to legitimize retaliatory humiliation. While one case is about an imagined humiliation, the response is a real one.

Humiliation has always been a political tool, but never before has it been so visible in international relations. Political humiliation is the act of humiliating, degrading or shaming a nation, group or individual in the political arena. Powerful states use actions and rhetoric to undermine the dignity, sovereignty or status of less powerful political entities. Political humiliation has been a deliberate colonial tool for centuries, designed and practised to subjugate, dominate and oppress colonised societies. Humiliation was designed to create and reinforce a sense of inferiority among the colonised, thereby legitimising discipline and punishment.

Recent cases of political humiliation in international relations follow similar patterns, with one key difference: today, humiliation is visualized, making it more visceral for its targets. It is increasingly staged, amplified, and consumed as spectacle. Representations of political humiliation appear everywhere, from the mainstream media to social media.

On February 28, 2025, the world watched an eccentric act of political humiliation live on TV.  During an official meeting at the White House, U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance publicly mocked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Following what appeared to be a moment of public humiliation, President Trump remarked: “It was great television.”

Humiliation is a catalytic force, pivotal in the rise and fall of empires, the sparking of wars and revolutions, and in conflict preferences. Humiliation has become a norm in international relations. Humiliation persists as a longue durée of colonialism, institutionalized through racial capitalism, nationalism, and other structures that designate certain groups as perpetually exploitable or disposable.  

Since humiliation is collective and embedded in social structures, it is subsequently political. Because it targets group identities (class, gender, religion, race, or sexuality), it is inextricable from broader systems of power: patriarchy, racism, capitalism, and heteronormativity. Thus, it is both a collective and politicized force.

The ongoing genocide in Palestine started a long time ago with the dehumanization of Palestinians. Humiliation is a structural component of genocide. Perhaps the most violent form of humiliation Palestinians endure is the denial of recognition as a nation. The most recent stage of the genocide can only be described as the “humiliation of hunger”, starvation of a people, forcing them into “the humiliation queues” not for freedom but for food.

The Israeli and American military operations against Iran are part of a longer strategy to “bring Iran to its knees.” 

Since decades ago, Iran has been subjected to one of the most complex and punishing sanctions regimes in modern history, largely led by the United States. The sanction has been called ‘the most known crippling sanction in the history’. On individual level, for Iranians this has meant being denied the opportunity for individual self-realisation and restricted global mobility. They are denied the role of being active agent in processes of shaping collective future. This form of humiliation renders Iran’s historical role and its people’s aspirations unthinkable.

Sanctions produce a pervasive sense of powerlessness. Iranians are acutely aware that a single statement from the White House can plunge their currency, skyrocket inflation, or restrict access to essential goods. The ongoing uncertainty and the constant threat of escalation of conflict generate a national atmosphere of anxiety and insecurity. American officials often state that “all options remain on the table”, a thinly veiled reference to military invasion. Such discourse translates into a daily sense of vulnerability and fear.

When United States presidents speak of “crippling sanctions” or “bringing Iran to its knees”, they invoke metaphors of bodily harm to describe political strategy. Iranian commentators use similar terms like tahrimhaye falaj konandeh (crippling sanctions), revealing a shared perception of biopolitical control.  The goal is to wear down resistance, to ‘cripple’ Iranians and force them into submission through “bringing them to their knees”.

Here, humiliation is not just an effect of conflict. It is a tactic in diplomacy. However, negotiations are unlikely to succeed, due to decades of mutual mistrust and accumulated traumas. The fear of further humiliation is based on experience of past humiliations.

Humiliation has historical depth. Since World War II, Iran has endured a series of political humiliations, many at the hands of Western powers. The Allied occupation of Iran during WWII —despite its declared neutrality— led to famine and mass death. In 1953, the CIA orchestrated a coup against Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. After the 1979 revolution, Iran was further demonized. During the post-9/11 “War on Terror,” President George W. Bush branded Iran as part of the “Axis of Evil.” In 2018, Trump unilaterally withdrew from the nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), a move that symbolized contempt rather than diplomacy. The White House continues humiliation as a political tool. In early May Trump announced his plan to rename the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf. Past humiliation structures anticipate future politics.

Repeated humiliations lead to a sense of vulnerability to unpredictable humiliation. It destroys a people’s capacity for trust. The anticipatory humiliation, and awareness of further humiliations, Iranian authorities demand that Western power “speak to Iranians with respect (ezzat) and dignity (keramat)”. In March 2025, ahead of a planned negotiation with the U.S., Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian warned:

Today, some nations, including the United States and certain European countries, mistakenly believe that Iran has weakened and that they can apply pressure. What they fail to grasp is that the people of Iran will never submit to humiliation.

Yet the United States and Israel continued the same politics of humiliation and they were not alone. Just days after Israel launched its war against Iran, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz expressed his support by stating, “This is the dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.”

He used the word ‘drecksarbeit’, the same term Nazi Germany used to describe the machinery of the Holocaust.  By “us,” Merz was referring to the European Union. Once again humiliated, Iranians continue to distrust the world.

The Empire is addicted to humiliating. Like any addictive behaviour, it begins with the pursuit of pleasure. In this context, the humiliation of others produces a perverse form of satisfaction that leads to a gloating over one’s supposed superiority or racialized privilege.

Humiliation is most effective when it is affirmed or ignored by the broader social world. The sense of injustice becomes even more wounding when met with silence and indifference. When the world looks away, humiliation becomes normalized, depoliticized, and embedded in daily life. Then Iranians are assumed to deserve humiliation

Humiliation as geopolitics is extremely dangerous. History has shown that political humiliation tends to trigger dark backlashes fuelling nationalist or religious fundamentalist movements.

The Iranian state, itself humiliated on the global stage, has responded by tightening its grip on civil society. Political repression, suppression of NGOs, restrictions on freedom of expression, and targeting of marginalized groups all intensify as international pressure grows.

Since the 1979 revolution, various groups, women, Baha’is, sexual minorities, and migrants, have faced systematic humiliation codified in law and policy. The recent military attack on Iran and the subsequent effort to bring the Iranian regime to its knees have had serious consequences for Iranian civil society. In the days following the ceasefire with Israel, more than 700 people were arrested on vague “security” charges. Hardliners have intensified their crackdown on activists, particularly those from minority communities. Afghan migrants have been scapegoated and accused of spying for Israel.In effect, the more the regime is humiliated by the West, the more it turns to humiliating its own people.

Humiliation is distinct from shame. While shame stems from self-perceived inadequacy, humiliation is externally imposed by a perpetrator. This distinction explains why humiliation, unlike shame, often motivates retaliatory action against its perceived source.  Humiliation is an action which provokes a reaction —whether of submission, resistance, or retaliation.

However, the response to humiliation does not always lead to more exclusion. It can also catalyse transnational solidarity. To resist oppression and domination, whether by the United States or the Iranian regime we must first resist humiliation as a form of politics.

The feminist movement Women, Life, Freedom started the Fall 2022 was also a reaction of women against institutionalized humiliation of women in Iran. The global pro-Palestinian movement is a powerful example of a politics of dignity confronting a politics of humiliation. In such cases, humiliation does not disappear. It is rather refused, resisted, and politicized as a basis for collective action.