Iran-Israel Conflict: Are Israel and the West Losing Ground?

The average scholar or analyst of Middle Eastern and global conflicts often evaluates the Iran-Israel conflict without exploring the brief history of Israel itself, specifically, how it came into existence and, more importantly, why. As a result, these narratives often present fragmented accounts. It is as if the Arab-Israeli conflict, along with the Iran-Israel conflict that emerged after the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, are simply geopolitical disputes with standard solutions like those found elsewhere in the world. Given the recent events in aerial warfare between Iran and Israel since Friday the 13th of June, along with Donald Trump’s concerning statement suggesting that the US might intervene on Israel’s behalf against Iran, it is reasonable to assume that the world may face a significant conflict, potentially even World War III, in the coming years. As a result, it is crucial to recognise the importance of understanding the Iran-Israel conflict.

What many scholars deliberately overlook or consider insignificant is that Israel was a product of Western colonial rule, which was prevalent in many Afro-Asian countries during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Although Israel was established in 1948, when European colonies in Afro-Asia were undergoing decolonisation, its creation served the interests of Western powers during this colonial era and beyond, particularly in the post-colonial period. Israel was designed to further the agendas of former colonial rulers and emerging neo-colonial entities, such as the United States, thereby perpetuating their dominance in the postcolonial Third World. Therefore, Israel has never been a legitimate state, with claims and historical narratives that are often constructed or exaggerated.

Last but not least, what has been going on vis-à-vis the Iran-Israel conflict since the 13th of June has posed a grave threat to world peace, and also an existential threat to both Israel and Iran, and deserves global attention to find a quick solution to resolve the problem. Unfortunately, Donald Trump’s latest and least expected threats to Iran and the Khameini Regime are that the US under his administration is likely to invade Iran in defence of Israel. The sooner the world restrains Israel from initiating a full-fledged war in the Middle East between Iran on the one hand and the US and Israel on the other, having the potential to trigger World War III, the better.

We know that the Iran-Israel conflict is one of the most complex and enduring geopolitical rivalries in the world. It is characterised not by direct large-scale military confrontation but by a multidimensional proxy conflict involving cyber warfare, assassinations, regional militias, and ideological hostilities. The roots of this conflict stretch back decades, grounded in divergent political ideologies, religious narratives, and strategic ambitions. While Iran champions itself as the vanguard of the Islamic Revolution and resistance against Western and Israeli influence, Israel sees Iran as an existential threat due to its nuclear ambitions and support for anti-Israel groups.

We need to understand the historical roots of the Iran-Israel conflict, its present manifestations, and the possible scenarios for its future. It delves into the conflict’s ideological, political, and military dimensions, analyses regional and international involvement, and assesses prospects for either escalation or détente.

The Historical Roots of the Iran-Israel Conflict

1)    Pre-1979: Strategic Allies in the Middle East

Before the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran and Israel shared a covert but strategic alliance. Under the Shah, Iran was a pro-Western monarchy and one of the few Muslim-majority countries to recognise Israel de facto. Both states viewed Arab nationalism, particularly under Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser, as a mutual threat and collaborated in intelligence sharing, arms sales, and economic ventures like oil trade. This pragmatic cooperation was primarily driven by shared interests rather than ideological affinity.

2)    The 1979 Islamic Revolution: A Paradigm Shift

The 1979 Iranian Revolution marked a turning point. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s rise to power replaced the pro-Western monarchy with an Islamic theocracy rooted in Shia revolutionary ideology. One of the regime’s cornerstones became opposition to Israel, which it labelled the “Zionist regime” and an illegitimate occupier of Muslim lands. Iran severed all ties with Israel, transformed the Israeli embassy in Tehran into a Palestinian mission, and began supporting anti-Israel groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon and, later, Hamas in the Palestinian territories.

3) Exporting the Revolution and the Rise of Hezbollah

Iran’s post-revolution foreign policy aimed to export its ideological model across the Middle East, often in opposition to Israel and Western allies. Its most significant proxy became Hezbollah, founded in the early 1980s during the Lebanese civil war. Iran provided Hezbollah with training, funding, and weapons, enabling it to grow into a formidable militia and political actor. The 2006 Lebanon War between Hezbollah and Israel underscored Iran’s indirect military reach and opened a new chapter in Iran-Israel hostilities.

The Present-Day Conflict: Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions and Israeli Security Doctrine

One of the most contentious aspects of the Iran-Israel conflict is Iran’s nuclear program. While Iran insists that its nuclear pursuits are for civilian purposes, Israel and much of the West suspect Iran of seeking nuclear weapons capability. Israel, which maintains a policy of nuclear ambiguity, views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat and has repeatedly stated that it will not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

In 2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was signed between Iran and the P5+1 nations (U.S., U.K., France, Russia, China, and Germany), offering Iran sanctions relief in return for nuclear restrictions. Israel opposed the deal, arguing it merely delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions and empowered its regional proxies. The U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 under President Trump, under heavy lobbying from Israel, led to increased tensions and a resumption of Iranian nuclear activity beyond agreed limits.

Covert Warfare: Cyber Attacks, Assassinations, and Sabotage

Unlike traditional wars, much of the Iran-Israel conflict occurs in the shadows. Israel has been linked to a series of cyberattacks, such as the Stuxnet virus that sabotaged Iranian centrifuges in 2010, and targeted killings of Iranian nuclear scientists, including Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in 2020. Iran has retaliated with cyberattacks of its own, targeting Israeli infrastructure and attempting to disrupt national systems.

This covert war escalates tensions without open military engagement, allowing plausible deniability while maintaining a constant state of strategic pressure.

The Syrian Civil War: A Proxy Battlefield

The Syrian civil war added a new dimension to the conflict. Iran has deployed troops and backed militias in Syria to support the Assad regime, establishing a network of bases near Israeli borders. Israel has responded with hundreds of airstrikes on Iranian targets in Syria, aiming to prevent entrenchment and the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah.

This indirect confrontation raises the risk of wider conflict, as any miscalculation or unintended casualty could trigger a broader war involving other regional and global powers.

Regional Realignments and the Abraham Accords

The normalisation of ties between Israel and several Arab states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco, through the Abraham Accords has changed the regional calculus. These new alliances are partly driven by mutual concern over Iran’s regional ambitions. While Iran condemns these agreements as betrayals of the Palestinian cause, Israel sees them as strategic victories that isolate Iran.

Saudi Arabia, while not formally aligned with Israel, shares a common interest in countering Iran, particularly in the context of Iranian involvement in Yemen and the broader Gulf region.

The Future of the Iran-Israel Conflict: Potential for Escalation

The potential for direct military confrontation remains real. Key flashpoints include:

Nuclear Threshold Crossing: If Iran crosses an atomic threshold, Israel may resort to a military strike, either alone or with U.S. support, to destroy or delay the program.

Hezbollah-Israel War: A future conflict with Hezbollah could drag Iran into a wider regional war, mainly if Iranian personnel or interests are targeted directly.

Red Sea and Maritime Routes: Iranian attacks on Israeli-linked ships and vice versa could escalate tensions on a global trade front.

Given the advanced weaponry on both sides, including drones and precision-guided missiles, a future war could be highly destructive, especially for civilian populations.

Diplomatic and Strategic Restraints

As Israel’s principal ally and a signatory to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—an agreement aimed at limiting Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief—the United States plays both a deterrent role and a potential mediator. However, President Trump has suggested the possibility of invading Iran on behalf of Israel, sending mixed signals. He understands that a U.S. invasion of Iran could potentially drag China into the conflict, along with other countries such as Russia, Turkey, Pakistan, and North Korea.

Iran is vital to China as its leading energy supplier and a strategic ally, particularly with the development of the Chabahar Port, which aims to establish road and railway connections linking Iran to China through Afghanistan. Nonetheless, internal political instability, economic challenges, and public fatigue in China and the U.S. may reduce the appetite for a full-scale war.

Moreover, while China and Russia have close ties with Israel, which is not viewed as their sworn enemy in the realms of trade or strategic rivalry, they do have significant issues with the US and its allies. However, these geo-strategic problems are not overwhelming enough for either country to actively challenge the US regarding the contentious Iran-Israel conflict.

Prospects for Diplomacy and De-escalation

While the ideological divide is vast, diplomacy remains possible, particularly if the US and other international actors are involved. A new, more comprehensive agreement that addresses both Iran’s nuclear programme and its regional activities could theoretically reduce tensions. However, this would require significant compromises:

Iran would need to reduce its support for groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and Houthis and accept more intrusive inspections.

Israel would have to support diplomatic avenues and ease its covert operations, at least temporarily.

Track-two diplomacy, backchannel negotiations, and regional confidence-building measures (CBM) may offer incremental progress without a grand bargain.

Long-Term Strategic Trends

The future of the Iran-Israel conflict will also be shaped by broader geopolitical trends:

a) Changing US Priorities: As the US pivots toward the Indo-Pacific, regional actors may take more initiative in shaping the Middle East’s future.

b) Technological Warfare: Cyber warfare, artificial intelligence, and drone technology will play an increasing role in the conflict’s evolution.

c) Iranian Political Shifts: Leadership changes in Iran, especially after the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, could open the door to new policy directions. However, there is no guarantee that post-Khamenei Iran will be a liberal country, if not a democracy.

Trump’s plans to invade Iran have taken a back seat

After abruptly leaving the G-7 Summit in Alberta, Canada, on June 17, Donald Trump contemplated the possibility of invading Iran to support Israel and punish the Iranian regime for its alleged nuclear proliferation. His statements on this matter have been inconsistent. As of June 19th, he indicated that he would decide on military action after two weeks. His public statement, “We could kill Khamenei, but we are not doing it now,” crosses all limits of diplomatic norms, civility, and international law. He also urges Iranians to evacuate Tehran. He appears to be apprehensive, as public opinion in both the United States and among its allies is essentially against any military intervention in Iran.

He also understands that a US invasion of Iran is unlikely to result in the surrender of the Islamic regime. Furthermore, Iran could close the Strait of Hormuz to disrupt world trade, driving up oil prices globally. Without boots on the ground, mere airstrikes would likely be ineffective against Iran. For instance, using B-2 bombers to destroy Iran’s nuclear facility at Fordow, which is buried deep under mountains, would be nearly impossible. Lastly, Sayyed Abdul Malik Houthi, the leader of Yemen’s Ansarullah Resistance and Chief of the Houthi militia, has issued a warning to Trump regarding potential aggression against Iran, stating that such actions would be “dangerous” for the West. He stated that if the United States were to invade Iran, the Houthis would obstruct shipping lines in the Red Sea, which would have catastrophic consequences for international trade.

Given the ongoing violence in Gaza, where over 55,000 Palestinians have died since October 2023, it remains uncertain whether Donald Trump will follow through with his ambiguous declaration of war against Iran shortly. Suppose the US and its allies decide to engage in a direct and comprehensive war against Iran. In that case, other regional stakeholders—such as China and, notably, Russia (which is already involved in a proxy war against the US in Ukraine), along with Pakistan and possibly Turkey and North Korea—are unlikely to remain neutral. Both Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin have condemned Trump’s consideration of an American invasion of Iran. China and Russia view Iran as a crucial ally for economic and geopolitical reasons and would not stand by while Iran is weakened. For China, Iran is an essential energy supplier and strategic ally; the Chabahar Port, currently under construction, could provide significant benefits by establishing road and railway connections between Iran and China via Afghanistan. Pakistan is particularly aware that Israel and its Western supporters, especially the US, may attempt to diminish Pakistan’s influence, particularly regarding its nuclear capabilities, following Iran’s possible destruction, similar to the events that unfolded in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Syria.

It is noteworthy that, with the exceptions of Turkey, Yemen, and Pakistan, no other Muslim-majority country from Morocco to Indonesia has condemned Israel’s actions in Iran and Gaza. The indiscriminate and brutal massacre of Palestinians by Israel since October 2023 has garnered only mild and restrained criticism from across the Muslim world. This Gaza massacre appears to be a test case that has emboldened Israel to consider further military actions against Iran. However, Iran’s retaliation has taken Israel and its Western allies by surprise. The “unstoppable” Iranian missile attacks in the first week of the conflict have made Israel and its allies, particularly the United States, very anxious. It seems that Israel is feeling the pressure and is quickly depleting its anti-missile defences. It is noteworthy that with the exceptions of Turkey, Yemen, and Pakistan, no other Muslim-majority country from Morocco to Indonesia has come forward in condemnation of the Israeli highhandedness in Iran and Gaza. The indiscriminate and brutal Israeli massacre of Palestinians since October 2023 also evoked very tame and restrained criticism of Israel and the West across the Muslim World. Seemingly, the Gaza Massacre has been the test case to further embolden Israel to open another killing field in Iran. However, Iran’s retaliation has taken Israel and its Western allies aback. And the “unstoppable” Iranian missile attacks in the first week of the war have turned Israel and its allies, especially the US, very nervous. Seemingly, Israel is nervous and fast running out of anti-missile weapons.

Conclusion

The Iran-Israel conflict is far more than a bilateral dispute—it is a clash of ideologies, regional ambitions, and global alliances. Its historical roots lie in revolutionary transformation and diverging national interests, while its present is defined by proxy warfare, nuclear brinkmanship, and strategic manoeuvring. The future remains uncertain, oscillating between the danger of open war and the hope for strategic de-escalation. Younger generations in Iran and Israel may demand less ideological confrontation and more economic and diplomatic engagement.

Ultimately, the resolution of this conflict depends not only on the two nations involved but also on the regional and global willingness to support dialogue over confrontation, stability over ideology, and diplomacy over destruction. While the path to peace is fraught with obstacles, the cost of continued hostility—human, economic, and geopolitical—is too high to ignore.

In summary, the ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel is primarily driven by Israel’s unprovoked and illegal actions against Iran, rather than by religious or ethnic tensions. Israel was established to serve the colonial interests of Western imperialists, particularly Britain and France, shortly before the end of European colonialism in 1948. Theodore Herzl, one of the founding figures of Zionism, wrote in his 1896 booklet “The Jewish State” to gain Western support for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. He argued that this Jewish state would serve as a “Western rampart in the heart of the Arab world.” This statement clearly illustrates that Israel was fundamentally about defending Western imperial interests in the region.

Furthermore, the so-called postcolonial era, which is often said to have begun after World War II in 1945, has effectively upheld the neo-colonial interests of former colonial powers and their allies, including Germany and the United States. Understanding this context is crucial to grasping the ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel. It is not a battle between Muslims and Jews, Christians and Muslims, or even between Shia and Sunni. The Sunni majority monarchies in the Arab world, who have been staunchly loyal to the West, are either apathetic or hostile toward Iran, not solely because of sectarian differences with the Shiite regime, but also due to Iran’s insistence on abolishing monarchies and historical grievances.

In summary, the ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel is primarily driven by Israel’s unprovoked and illegal invasion of Iran, rather than by religious or ethnic tensions. Israel was established to serve the colonial interests of Western imperialists, particularly Britain and France, shortly before the end of European colonialism in 1948. Theodore Herzl, one of the founding figures of Zionism, wrote in his 1896 booklet The Jewish State to garner Western support for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. He argued that this Jewish state would act as a “Western rampart in the heart of the Arab world.” This statement clearly illustrates that Israel was fundamentally about defending Western imperialism in the region.

Furthermore, the so-called postcolonial era, which is often said to have begun after World War II in 1945, has effectively served to uphold the neo-colonial interests of former colonial powers and their allies, including Germany and the United States. Understanding this is crucial to grasping the ongoing Iran-Israel war. Not Muslim-Jewish, Christian-Muslim or Shia-Sunni from any stretch of the imagination! The Sunni majority monarchies in the Arab World – who have been ultra-loyal to the West – are apathetic or hostile towards Iran not because of their sectarian differences with Shiite Iran, but also because of the Iranian Shia regime’s insistence on abolishing monarchies and historical problems.

*A historian-cum-cultural anthropologist and security analyst, Taj Hashmi, Ph.D., FRAS, is a former Professor of Security Studies at the APCSS, US. He has written several books, hundreds of journal articles, and newspaper op-eds. As an analyst of current affairs, he regularly appears on talk shows about Bangladesh, South Asia, and World affairs. His latest book, Fifty Years of Bangladesh, 1971-2021: Crises of Culture, Development, Governance, and Identity, was published by Palgrave-Macmillan in May 2022. Tel: 1+ 647 447 2609. Email: [email protected]