The latest Israeli strikes on Iran — and the developments that followed — have unveiled several critical truths about the region. Chief among them is the role of the United States administration, particularly its duplicity.
While Tehran was engaged in multiple rounds of negotiations with Washington over its nuclear program — negotiations that President Trump repeatedly claimed to support — the U.S. abruptly shifted gears. With no hesitation, Trump moved to justify the Israeli attack, placing full blame on Iran for rejecting American proposals. He even went as far as mocking the destruction and assassinations inflicted upon Iran. It became evident that the Trump administration was not only aware of the planned Israeli strikes, but had likely participated in misleading Tehran, offering false reassurances while giving at least a green light — if not direct support — for the attack, contrary to official U.S. denials.
A Fundamental Shift in Israel’s Doctrine
Even more revealing than Washington’s stance is the transformation in Israeli strategy following the October 7 resistance operation. What we are witnessing is not a tactical adjustment but a near-total reversal of Israel’s long-held security doctrine, one that had shaped its military and political posture for decades. In its place, the Netanyahu government is actively constructing a new, more aggressive policy — one that does not wait for threats to materialise but aims to preempt any future threat, real or hypothetical.
In Gaza, the Palestinian resistance announced from day one its readiness to end the war. It accepted all serious proposals for a ceasefire and even offered a comprehensive prisoner exchange deal to release all Israeli captives in one go. Despite this, the Israeli government rejected all efforts toward de-escalation, including those it initiated through Washington.
In the occupied West Bank, which never posed a military threat to Israel — especially during the current war — the Netanyahu government escalated its settlement projects, house demolitions, and forced displacements, further deepening its occupation.
In Lebanon, Hizbullah maintained its engagement at a limited level to avoid a full-scale war, repeatedly affirming that it does not seek escalation. Still, Israel’s military strategy has been to pursue total degradation of Hizbullah’s forces, including targeted operations against its strategic assets and senior leadership, notably Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah.
Syria, under the post-war Assad regime, has declared time and again that it seeks peace and will not allow any group to launch attacks on Israel from its territory. It has even engaged in security talks with Israel through third-party mediation. Nevertheless, Israeli airstrikes, assassinations, kidnappings, and even plans for settlement expansion and partition in Syria continue unabated.
Even Compliance Doesn’t Shield Iran
Iran is no exception. Despite not intervening directly in the Gaza war, despite its restrained and symbolic responses to repeated Israeli strikes — including the assassination of senior Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh’s family members on Iranian soil — and despite being engaged in nuclear talks with Washington, Iran was still subjected to a major Israeli military assault.
This confirms a sobering truth: Israel is no longer reacting to threats. It is preemptively dismantling the mere possibility of future threats through cross-border aggression, military occupation, targeted assassinations, and the establishment of buffer zones across the region.
No One Is Safe — Not Even the “Neutral”
This war has proven that no one is immune to Israeli aggression, and that its aim to redraw the regional map is not empty rhetoric — it is a deliberate, ongoing policy. Israel’s strategy is to isolate and weaken every potential adversary, whether real or imagined, one by one, at a time of its choosing and on its own terms.
This reality renders any hope of avoiding Israeli hostility through silence, minimal responses, or political neutrality dangerously misguided. On the contrary, such inaction only emboldens the occupation to accelerate its agenda — unchecked.
Two Messages — One Warning
The first message is to Iran:
Do not rush back to negotiations with the same U.S. administration that enabled your bombing. Not before breaking the momentum of Israeli attacks and resetting the rules of engagement. Returning to the table without doing so would hand Israel a strategic victory, forcing Iran to negotiate from a position of weakness, likely offering greater concessions while leaving itself vulnerable to renewed and escalated Israeli strikes in the future.
Iran’s response must include prolonged attrition, targeting both strategic infrastructure and internal Israeli morale. Despite Israel’s military edge and international support, it remains less equipped to withstand a war of attrition than Iran, due to its size, societal structure, and political system.
The second message is for regional states and Islamic movements:
You are all on the Israeli target list, whether today or tomorrow, regardless of your stance. Silence or even indirect complicity will not protect you. Israel’s reading of “future threats” includes Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and even Saudi Arabia, whether or not they currently have peace deals or are moving toward normalisation.
Conclusion: The Old Rules Are Dead
The rules, balances, and assumptions that existed before October 7, 2023, are gone, especially for Israel. Any party that insists on navigating today’s landscape with outdated logic will find itself vulnerable, exposed, and ultimately defeated.
In a region undergoing rapid transformation, where massive confrontations reshape the political and military map daily, clinging to old certainties is not just naive — it is suicidal.
To be continued.
This work demands time, pressure, and sacrifice.
But we do it—for the Ummah, and for the truth.
If you believe in this mission, stand with us.
Click here to Donate & Support Us
