Iran-Israel conflict can no longer be viewed as just bilateral but would not have probably reached this stage without Tel Aviv being backed by Washington. Certainly, there is nothing new about this. At the same time, it cannot be ignored that conflict began when US-Iran talks regarding latter’s nuclear program had been initiated. These have been suspended for now. This also implies, the talks would have probably continued and perhaps led to an improvement in US-Iran ties, if Israel had not opted for the so-called “preemptive strike” against Iran on Friday (June 13, 2025), viewed by latter as “declaration of war.” Timing of Israel’s “preemptive strike” is questionable as Iran doesn’t appear to have taken any step to provoke the former to take this move. It is possible, Tel Aviv was not comfortable with the idea of any nuclear deal being reached with Iran. The same may be said about pro-Israel lobby within United States.
Ironically, a key point of President Donald Trump’s campaign to enter the White House was his promise to end wars and bring peace. Now, it seems, he is nowhere this stage or at least doesn’t appear to be. The other point is probably Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not desirous of Trump reaching this stage where Palestine-state is concerned. Netanyahu appears to have “succeeded” on this front. Not much has been heard from Trump administration regarding Palestine since Iran-Israel crisis has dominated headlines. Not that Israel gave much importance earlier to what others thought of its strategy towards Palestinians or that it gives much significance now to their approach towards it shooting down those rushing for food. But earlier at least speculations were being voiced against these moves to the degree of some even voicing the need for a change of government in Tel Aviv. It appears, perhaps Netanyahu hopes that Israel’s strikes against Iran have confirmed his return to power. The next legislative elections in Israel are scheduled to be held in October, 2026. He was probable hopeful that a few strikes would be sufficient to lead to a collapse of Iran. He apparently underestimated Iran’s capability to strike back.
It isn’t surprising that now greater noise is being made about change of regime in Iran. Now, the question is:- Is this justified? Do other countries, including superpower and key powers, have the right the dictate/decide who should head government in other sovereign countries? Of course, this step was taken militarily in the name of Arab Spring to bring democracy in several countries by ousting their leaders. It failed. How can democracy be imposed by external powers and militarily? Perhaps, in the case of Iran, talk of “regime-change” has other cards in play. Iran is close to Russia and China. It is possible, regime-change will shift Tehran towards United States. But only if Israel has its way and convinces US about it. At present, as reports indicate, Russia and China are against this. The two are also against US strikes on Iran. Besides, critics have observed that regime-change is likely to lead to chaos within Iran and things may even go out of hand, impossible for external powers to handle. The impact that similar moves earlier had in Afghanistan and also Iraq cannot be ignored.
Continuation of the war isn’t spelling benefits for civilians either in Iran or in Israel. Regarding Israelis, they aren’t apparently used to their lives being disrupted in this manner. To a degree, the same may be said about Iranians. But the latter are certainly used to bias entertained against them by pro-US and pro-Israeli elements.
Paradoxically, some are comparing Iran-Israel conflict to the recent India-Pakistan tension. Well, there is no comparison of the two. Though India and Pakistan are viewed as permanent enemies, time and again cultural similarity has brought their people and even leaders together. Besides, both are non-signatories to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and respect a bilateral nuclear agreement, in force since 1991. This is also viewed as a Confidence Building Measure (CBM), as per which they exchange a list of their nuclear facilities every year and are bound to prevent intentional and/or accidental attack on these. Notwithstanding, their repeated engagement in bilateral tiffs, their nuclear diplomacy has been maintained.
US-Iran talks, which have been suspended, may also be viewed as the superpower having being on the verge of a key nuclear deal, regarding Iran’s nuclear program. If reached, without United States’ military involvement in Iran-Israel crisis, it would be considered a key diplomatic success for the superpower. Of course, till the conflict continues, the question of suspended talks being resumed doesn’t prevail. War only kills, has no winners. Besides, as latest reports indicate that though Trump maybe in favor of an attack on Iran, he isn’t keen to actually move in this direction. This is suggested by his having chosen not to rush into taking a decision on this front, a point which probably is not being welcomed by Israel. This certainly has given other powers time to exercise their diplomatic strategies for de-escalation of Iran-Israel war. If and when US opts for military involvement, the problem will not get resolved with this. War may not end with this. Netanyahu is eager for United States’ military involvement to destroy Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility. If it is actually hit, it is going to have a severe impact on the region as a whole. The possibility of American strikes’ “impact” on Fordow nuclear facility raising questions about United States’ nuclear policy and diplomacy cannot also be ignored. This would also amount to diplomatic strategy earlier given importance by Trump going haywire. Clearly, the key issue is the kind of “success” Trump hopes for, irrespective of what Netanyahu desires. Some importance should be given to US nuclear diplomacy and policy being at stake!
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Get the latest CounterCurrents updates delivered straight to your inbox.
Nilofar Suhrawardy is a senior journalist and writer with specialization in communication studies and nuclear diplomacy. She has come out with several books. These include:– Modi’s Victory, A Lesson for the Congress…? (2019); Arab Spring, Not Just a Mirage! (2019), Image and Substance, Modi’s First Year in Office (2015) and Ayodhya Without the Communal Stamp, In the Name of Indian Secularism (2006).
