The conflict is fundamentally about forcing a change in Iran’s government and dismantling the Axis of Resistance.
The assertion by the U.S., Israel, and their European allies that the attack on Iran was a “pre-emptive” measure to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is demonstrably false. It’s as credible as the claims made against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 2003, and this act of aggression is equally unlawful.
For nearly four decades, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that Iran is close to acquiring nuclear weapons. However, Israel and its powerful lobbying groups in Western nations have systematically undermined every attempt to establish an agreement that would increase monitoring and restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities.
To properly understand Israel’s attack on Iran, the facts need to be established. The Israeli leadership claims a pre-emptive strike was necessary, but they have offered no evidence to support the allegation that Iran was about to acquire nuclear weapons. This assertion alone does not constitute proof; it is merely a claim, similar to the U.S.’s assertion that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.
In March, the US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, stated that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”
Furthermore, Iran was actively engaged in indirect talks with the U.S. to create a revised version of the 2015 Nuclear Deal. In 2018, Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew Washington from the agreement and instead, at Israel’s urging, pursued a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign.
Despite Netanyahu and Trump’s allegations that Iran was violating the Nuclear Deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stated that Iran was fully adhering to the agreement at the time.
An examination of conversations with neo-conservatives, Israeli war hawks, and Washington-based think tanks reveals that their opposition to the Obama-era Nuclear Deal invariably extends to concerns about Iran’s ballistic missile program and its backing of regional non-state actors.
Israeli officials frequently assert that Iran is “years”, “months”, or even “weeks” away from producing a nuclear weapon; this has become commonplace. However, their primary concern has consistently been Iran’s support for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, which advocate for the creation of a Palestinian state.
The proof is simple. Israel cannot independently destroy Iran’s extensive nuclear program. It’s also questionable whether the U.S. could destroy it, even if it joined the war. The American failure to destroy missile storage bases in Yemen, built into mountainous ranges, using bunker-buster munitions dropped from B-2 bombers, illustrates the U.S.’s difficulty in penetrating Iranian-style bunkers, where many of Iran’s nuclear facilities are located.
Almost immediately after initiating the war on Iran, Netanyahu addressed the Iranian people in English, seeking to incite civil unrest. The Israeli prime minister has since strongly implied that regime change is his true objective, suggesting that the operation “may lead” to it.
Israel’s own intelligence agencies and military leaders have also expressed doubts about their air force’s ability to single-handedly destroy the Iranian nuclear program. Therefore, why initiate this war if the stated reason for its “pre-emptive” launch is unattainable?
There are two possible explanations:
The first is that the Israeli prime minister has launched this assault on Iran as a final act in his “seven front war,” hoping to resolve the regional conflict through a deadly exchange that will ultimately harm both sides.
In this scenario, the desired outcome would be to conclude the war by claiming that Netanyahu successfully destroyed or significantly damaged Iran’s nuclear program. He would also add claims, as he is already doing, that a significant number of Iranian missiles and drones were eliminated. This would also explain the opening Israeli strike, which killed senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and nuclear scientists. It would be the perfect propaganda mix to sell a victory narrative.
Conversely, Tehran would likely claim victory as well. Both sides could then present favorable results to their populations, and tensions would subside for a period. Washington-based think tanks, notably , discuss the ability to contain the war.
The second explanation, which could be an additional benefit hoped for by the Israelis and the U.S., is that this is a full-scale regime change war intended to involve the U.S.
Israel’s military reputation suffered greatly during the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, and since then, it has not achieved a victory against any enemy. Hamas continues to operate in Gaza with a similar number of fighters as at the start of the war, Hezbollah has been significantly weakened but remains active, and Yemen’s Ansarallah has only grown stronger. This represents a comprehensive defeat for the Israeli military and an embarrassment for the U.S.
Iran is widely recognized as the regional power supporting what is known as the Axis of Resistance. Without Iran, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas would be considerably weakened. While armed resistance to Israeli occupation will inevitably persist as long as occupied people exist and live under oppressive rule, destroying Iran would severely impact the regional alliance against Israel.
The key question, however, is whether regime change is even feasible. This is highly uncertain, and it appears more likely that this will escalate into a nuclear war.
The Israeli-U.S. claim that this war is somehow pre-emptive, for which no proof exists, is made even more absurd by the fact that Iran may now actually be motivated to acquire nuclear weapons for defensive purposes. If they cannot trust the Israelis not to bomb them with U.S. support, even during supposed negotiations, how can any deal ever be negotiated?
Even if the U.S. joins and inflicts a major blow to the Iranian nuclear program, it does not guarantee that Iran will abandon the program entirely. Instead, Tehran might simply rebuild and acquire the bomb at a later date. Another potential outcome of this war could be Israeli regime change, which also seems to be a possibility now.
“`