Iran is a country that never submits to Western dominance. History has witnessed the legacy of the Persian Empire and its dominance in many areas. Today, Iran is resisting the attacks of Israel on the pretext of the establishment of nuclear weapons. Israel is blatantly violating the sovereignty of a sovereign country and is not accountable to anyone. However, the recent escalation between Israel and Iran has shifted the power dynamics of Middle Eastern Politics. Iran has been isolated in the region with the help of recent maneuvers by Israel.

Israel is blatantly violating the sovereignty of a sovereign country and is not accountable to anyone.

After the Hamas attack on Israel and the retaliation attacks of Israel against the group, perpetuating genocide against innocent Palestinians, and the H3 proxy groups (Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis) strength has been eliminated by Israel in the region. These were the groups, Israel always perceived as a threat to its existence and security. Tactically, Israel killed their leaders and decreased the strength of Iran to indirectly hold leverage over Israel.

If one can see the map of Israel, one can observe that the proxy groups of Iran were surrounding Israel and were resistant to Israel attacking the interests of Iran in the region. Similarly, Syria, which was a route for Iran to pass weapons and other help to its proxy groups, is no longer present. Israel has supported the new regime of Ahmed Al-Sharaa to revolt against Bashar Al–Assad, who was a close ally of Iran. We cannot deny that Syria is an ally of Iran, where the new regime blatantly said,” Israel’s enemy is our enemy. Unfortunately, Iran has lost its control in the region and its H3 group’s strength.

Now, it is undeniable that Israel is controlling the airspace of Iran, as mentioned in the official statements by the US administration. But one cannot deny that Iran is also brilliantly confronting Israel and launching attacks on Israel. Several civilians have been killed on both sides, and still, the warmongering leaders show no sign of relief to halt further escalation. One can ponder why Israel attacked Iran amid ongoing Oman talks between Iran and the United States.

Israel attacked Iran on the pretext of the establishment of a nuclear weapon. But the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that we don’t find any evidence of the establishment of nuclear weapons in Iran while interviewing Al Jazeera. Even Iran was engaged with the USA in the Oman talks to de-escalate tensions and find a diplomatic solution to the issue. One can clearly say that Israel needs to eliminate Iran, but does not need a peaceful resolution of the nuclear issue.

External attacks unite people and direct public favor to their leaders.

The US wants a regime change, and they want a puppet regime in Iran that cannot hurt their interests in the region. As Israel’s President Benjamin Netanyahu clearly said,” Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini is a danger for us”, but this is not an easy task as Israel is predicting. Instead, Israel said that we are working well of Iranians to change their regime, but this is not the real scenario. It is evident from many instances that external attacks unite people and direct public favor of public to their leaders. The India-Pakistan recent escalation is in case in point of how the attack by India united the Pakistani public. Now, we can see that protests are being held in Iran against Israel; Iranians are united as never before.

Indeed, the United States has pursued several regime-change policies, overthrowing governments it considered hostile or contrary to its interests. For instance, it overthrew Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh of Iran through a CIA-organized coup in 1953; this one, too, rebounded later, creating an anti-American sentiment so deep-seated that it erupted into the Islamic Revolution of 1979. The United States invaded Iraq in 2003 to oust Saddam Hussein from power because he supposedly had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) that were never discovered.

The regime’s downfall, however, only plunged Iraq into years of turmoil, civil war, and the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). NATO-backed efforts supported the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya in 2011, but the country descended into chaos, with rival militias and the absence of a functioning central government. Similarly, in Syria, U.S. support to various rebel factions is aimed at toppling the regime of Bashar al-Assad; however, such efforts backfire, strengthening Assad’s grip and aggravating the humanitarian crisis within the Syrian territory. These cases clearly show that regime change can take out leaders, but it rarely fails to provide stability or democracy, or does not herald enduring peace.

Therefore, Iran is not like the countries where the US supported regime change. The geography and geopolitical influence of Iran make it hard for Israel and the US to easily change the regime. Israel, as compared to Iran, is a tiny country that can bear more loss than Iran, as it has a wider geographical area. So the question is: which circumstances can enhance the chances of the US to directly engage in the conflict?

Regime change can take out leaders, but it rarely provides stability or democracy.

If Iran blocks the Strait of Hormuz, which is a waterway to 20 percent of global oil traffic, it will hurt US interests and might push Donald Trump to engage in the conflict to protect those interests. Secondly, if Iran hits US bases, it will also incentivize the conflagration. But Iran won’t block the Strait of Hormuz, as that would hurt the interests of Gulf countries as well.

There might be possibilities: this conflict might prolong and lead to a stalemate, or there might be urgent diplomatic efforts to diffuse the tensions. But one cannot forget Mr. Trump is an unpredictable man, and so are his policies as well. Still, the right course would be diplomatic endeavors.

There might be possibilities: this conflict prolongs and leads to a stalemate, or there might be urgent diplomatic efforts to diffuse the tensions. But one cannot forget Mr. Trump is an unpredictable man, and so are his policies. Still, the right course would be diplomatic endeavors.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.