The tension between Iran and Israel is escalating, especially after the attack on Hezbollah leader Nasrallah, with Iran firing 200 missiles at Israel.
The suddenness and intensity of this military action exceeded Israel's expectations, resulting in military casualties.
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stated that there would be a "strong retaliation" against Iran.
Does this situation indicate the onset of a sixth Middle Eastern war?
In this context, statements from the U.S. and Iran suggest a desire to de-escalate, but whether a ceasefire can truly be achieved remains doubtful.
The current situation seems to be heading towards an uncontrollable direction, with the Middle East resembling a Pandora's box that is difficult to close once opened.
The U.S. is clearly attempting to leverage Iran's weaknesses for balance.
A Pentagon spokesperson emphasized that Iran's actions would lead to security and economic consequences, implying that sanctions against Iran would continue to intensify.
This stands in stark contrast to the economic recovery goals sought by new Iranian President Pezeshkian, indicating that both the U.S. and Israel do not intend to give the Iranian government any breathing room.
Issues that should have been resolved through negotiations, such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Iran nuclear deal, have now become bargaining chips in the U.S.-Iran power struggle.
Iran's strategic decision-making is crucial; if it had aggressively pursued a multi-front war earlier, perhaps the situation would have been different.
However, Hamas's power has nearly vanished, and Hezbollah's leadership has been systematically decapitated, with the command structure facing collapse.
Now, if Iran does not change its strategy, it will lose the last opportunity for a turnaround.
Conversely, adopting new negotiation tactics might yield unexpected results.
Since the U.S. is unwilling to engage in negotiations, Iran could force concessions through unexpected military actions, but this requires Iran to have exceptional military command capabilities.
Supreme Leader Khamenei's statements indicate a degree of flexibility, calling for the withdrawal of the U.S. and the West, and suggesting that if Israel halts its attacks, the conflict might end.
While this is a form of condemnation, it also implies the possibility of allowing Israel's existence; if Khamenei can propose ceasefire conditions, it may pave the way for negotiations.
Despite Pezeshkian's capability in adjusting the economy, his political acumen and idealistic fantasies about the U.S. may hinder genuine reconciliation.
Meanwhile, hardliners in Iran could complicate matters further; Khamenei's death and the uncertainty of his successor make the future of Iranian politics even harder to predict.
At this stage, the more Iran appears weak, the more susceptible it becomes to further pressure from the U.S. and Israel.
Israel's decision-making is particularly crucial. Netanyahu claims he will retaliate strongly against Iran, potentially including attacks on key figures and military facilities.
This means that if Israel launches devastating strikes, the situation may become irreversible.
With the rise of far-right elements in Israel, Netanyahu is forced to compromise with them, increasing the likelihood of external conflict.
If the ruling coalition is controlled by the far-right, the risk of full-scale war will significantly increase.
Overall, as the situation develops, the likelihood of a sixth Middle Eastern war is growing.
If war breaks out between Iran and Israel, it will mark the true beginning of a Middle Eastern war; as Iran faces fewer external threats, Israel's expansionist intentions may intensify.
コメント