“THE WORLD RESPECTS POWER, NOT FRAGILITY” – HAKEEM BABA-AHMED
Read Time:2 Minute, 19 Second
By: Fasasi Hammad
It was predictable that the US and Israel would not withdraw empty-handed. With a massive arsenal of ships, planes, and weaponry capable of crippling a nation’s infrastructure and decapitating its leadership, Iran faced immense pressure. Yet, it entered negotiations—balancing between disarmament and annihilation.
Whether Iran sought a temporary reprieve out of fear or miscalculation is a matter for historians of conflict. What was clear was the certainty of a severe strike from the US and Israel. Popular unrest against Iran’s regime had already been brewing, even before the recent assault, fueled by anger at a government long seen as oppressive.
Iran’s leadership, encircled by hostility and struggling for solutions, still attempted dialogue through intermediaries, hoping for a miracle. Surrounded by historically unprecedented firepower, it engaged in negotiations over demands to dismantle strategic assets and submit to intense scrutiny—conditions typically reserved for the vanquished.
The strikes came on US and Israeli terms. Iran may have misread Trump, possibly believing that Congress or international allies could temper US action. But Trump operates outside conventional rules, particularly after the previous humiliating strikes Iran suffered at US-Israeli hands.
Iran may have overestimated the influence of its allies. Modern warfare shows that when threats loom overhead with unparalleled destructive potential, old alliances are insufficient. Only strength commands respect and protection. Weak nations have few genuine allies; proxies and surrogates can only do so much.
A realistic reading of the world should have told Iran that only the strong can command support. The US and Israel act decisively to protect their interests and maintain regional dominance. Past events, like Gaza or Western hesitation over Ukraine, demonstrate the limits of collective regional security. Iran, despite military power and regional influence, misjudged the deep strategic alignment between the US and Israel.
Now, Iran faces the consequences. It will continue limited missile strikes, but eventually, it must confront the overwhelming power of the US-Israel alliance. This will be a painful process, involving attempts to preserve remnants of the regime while contending with forces demanding radical change. Internal struggles will persist as Iranians seeking reform confront loyalists determined to retain the state’s core identity.
The region as a whole will feel the fallout. Palestinian rights, Arab surrogates, and neighboring countries will navigate intensified instability. Israel will maintain vigilance against both old and emerging threats. Trump will claim the operation as a political victory, applauded by segments of his base, but the US and Israel face broader regional turbulence. They must choose between supporting remnants of the old order or driving transformative change in Iran.
Ultimately, the US-Israel campaign has made the Middle East far more insecure, with consequences that will ripple across multiple countries and affect millions of lives.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0