In light of the burning confrontation between Iran and Israel, we do not have the attacks by the latter, except to be careful in the analysis. The battle is already a circle, and its consequences, especially with the escalation indicators and the increasing risks of internationalization, cannot be associated with the most dangerous confrontation in the region. The scene is more complicated after the American strike that was carried out today.
In the history of the confrontations that Israel has fought since its establishment, it did not face a stronger opponent that puts it in front of an existential challenge, as Iran, if we invoke all the confrontations that Israel has fought since 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, and 2006.
The Islamic Republic did not know a military confrontation, as is the existing confrontation, the Iran -Iraq war did not rise to it, given the technological and intelligence capabilities of Israel, and the lineage of Western countries behind it. Both countries face an existential challenge, in the midst of confrontation. Top failure, putting it in front of an existential test.
There is force alongside Israel with its military and intelligence and western support, especially the United States, which is not available to Iran, and there was no power of the great powers to line up alongside it, except for the expressions of denunciation, or Russia’s desire for mediation, which was rejected by Israel and some Western countries, except for Pakistan’s position supporting Iran, but Pakistan’s support does not amount to supporting the group of seven alongside Israel.
The purpose that Israel has not been repeated is not only the elimination of the nuclear program, but the overthrow of the regime in Iran, and the change of the engineering of the Middle East, which are directions shared by the United States in it, and the Western countries that have expressed a similar position at the summit of the Grand Group of Seven held on the 16th of this month, in Canada.
All confrontations secrete winners and losers, and the rules of the game change. The existing war, with the Israeli military superiority, is supported by the United States, and the parsing from Western countries, is not in the interest of Iran.
Iran has expressed, through its president, Masoud Boukhskian, that it does not intend to obtain the nuclear bomb, but what is the subject of a bet, is the same system that the confrontation places at the stake after a series of rice, whether at the internal or external level, through its arms in the region that were weakened, and the penetration of its security institutions, and the tension of the social and economic situation in the country.
In light of the confrontation, the targeting of civilians, the feelings of patriotism in Iran, and the feeling of anger at the aggression, will prevail, but will these feelings be proven? It is more likely that the Iranian regime will not come out of the confrontation.
For more than four decades, and since the outbreak of the Iranian revolution, Iran has been an ideological and political motivation in the region, whose influence exceeds the vicinity of the neighborhood, and it is likely that this effect will decay, and even disappear.
In contrast, Israel, the greatest winner, appears, at least in the short term, by neutralizing it with an existential enemy and its weakening, and by its grave a project to declare the Palestinian state by France and Saudi Arabia, and withholding the situation in Gaza, but can Israel translate its military superiority, supported by the United States, into a diplomatic balance? In other words, do the region accept, at the level of leaders and peoples, that Israel be a dominant force?
The view of Israel, from the moderate powers, will change in front of the defeat of what was seen as an Iranian threat, the absolute refusal of the Hebrew state to the two -state solution, and its tendency to impose “dictations”, that is, the direction of dictation, and the other parties must accept it.
The new situation resulting from the war would put forward a broken idea, which is: Middle East free of nuclear weapons, which was pushing for both Egypt and Turkey, and Saudi Arabia could be added to them.
As for the United States, the Middle East remained the arena in which it will be paid, as after the tripartite aggression against Egypt in 1956, it was able to neutralize Britain and France from the region, and she established what it called the new world order after the end of the Cold War, after the second Gulf War (1991), and established the monochrome polarity after the war on Iraq in 2003.
In light of changing the existing global hierarchy, the United States sends messages, through the war launched by Israel on Iran, to prove its leadership, just as US President Trump, in a tweet, expressed the day after the aggression, about the superiority of the American weapon. The message is directed by China and Russia.
But the force was not the decisive factor in drawing the engineering of relations between countries. Despite its military superiority, the United States has not resolved the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Middle East is not expected to become a “safe” region, as the official American discourse promotes, after the war launched by Israel on Iran.
As for the levels of the peoples in the region, the affiliate of anger will grow, with the appearance of the position of the United States in burning the Palestinian issue, and the formal abandonment of the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the exacerbation of the policy of double standards, pending an intellectual orientation that would employ anger, for a new separation of civilizations.
The Middle East, originally complicated, will complicate.
The opinions in the article do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al -Jazeera.