Tensions are escalating once again in the Middle East, and Iran has become the target of the United States and Israel’s threats. What is behind this escalation, especially against the backdrop of widespread protests and the risk of direct military confrontation?
Alexandr Svaranc
However, Tehran has concluded that the protest movement was instigated by US and Israeli intelligence services. The goal is to overthrow the constitutional order of the Islamic Republic to establish full control over Iran’s resources and policies.
On February 1, on the eve of the 47th Anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei clearly outlined the true objectives of the United States in his address to the nation.
- Restoring the monopoly of American capital over Iranian strategic resources (primarily oil and gas). Khamenei reminded the nation of the 30 years of US control during the Pahlavi era.
- Establishing military control over Iran’s strategically advantageous geographical position. Khamenei emphasized that Washington’s threats are nothing new. “The Iranian people are not afraid of aircraft carriers or threats. We will never initiate a war, but we will respond to any attack with a crushing blow,” he stated.
- Iran expressed readiness to negotiate with the US, proposing to freeze or halt nuclear development and transfer all its enriched uranium to Russia for safekeeping
According to Tehran, the United States and Israel sought, through mass protests and unrest, to provoke an acute domestic political crisis, cause “significant bloodshed,” and stir dissatisfaction with the regime. This was intended to create a pretext for external military intervention and the elimination of key figures within the Iranian leadership.
The United States’ attempts to popularize Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the last Shah, to revive the monarchy, have failed. His extremely low popularity in Iranian society, including among Azerbaijanis who suffered from the discriminatory policies of the Shah’s regime, has rendered these plans unviable.
The Iranian authorities swiftly contained the unrest, prevented an increase in casualties, and detained agent provocateurs. The timely internet shutdown prevented external forces from using social media to escalate the crisis. Reza Pahlavi’s calls for protests, his promises to lead Iran, recognize Israel, and act in the interests of the United States further undermined his standing in his homeland.
What will a new war with Iran lead to?
The question of potential military aggression by the United States and Israel against Iran is currently being actively discussed by experts. Accurately predicting the course of events is extremely difficult, especially given the unpredictability of Donald Trump.
The United States is actively deploying significant military forces to the Middle East, including major naval and air force units, missile systems, and special operations forces. The USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier is already in the Strait of Hormuz. American military bases in the region have been placed on high alert.
Simultaneously, negotiations with Azerbaijan on the sale of military equipment have intensified. In Armenia, the US has resumed discussions on the TRIP project (“Trump Road,” referring to the “Zangezur Corridor”), which may involve the deployment of military monitoring assets near the Armenian-Iranian border. In Israel, the Air Force and the IDF’s air defense systems have been placed on full combat alert, although this state is maintained continuously due to the unresolved conflict in Gaza.
Iranian reaction and warnings
In response to the show of force, Iran warned that any aggression would lead to a regional war, and that Israel would be considered a legitimate target for a retaliatory strike. Tehran placed its regular army and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on full combat alert. At rallies in support of the current regime, the Iranian public stated that changing the constitutional order is unacceptable, emphasizing that the 1979 Islamic Revolution is an achievement of all of Iranian society.
Drawing on the experience of the 12-day war in 2025 and previous missile exchanges with Israel, Tehran officially notified neighboring countries (in the Arab East, Türkiye, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan) providing their territory or airspace for an attack by the US and Israel on Iran would be considered complicity in aggression and would be followed by devastating strikes. The IRGC also intensified its efforts to identify enemy agents within Iran and conduct active intelligence operations in neighboring countries. For instance, on January 28, an Iranian intelligence network of six individuals was arrested in Türkiye (in Istanbul, Ankara, Van, Samsun, and Yalova), which had shown particular interest in the US Air Force base in Incirlik (Adana).
With the rise of a pro-Turkish proxy, Al-Sharaa, to power in Damascus, Israel began noting that Iran poses a lesser threat to the Jewish state than a Sunni Türkiye in alliance with Qatar and nuclear-armed Pakistan
Diplomatic efforts and the reaction of neighbors
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi visited Türkiye on a working visit, where he met with his counterpart Hakan Fidan and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Ankara offered its mediation services for the peaceful settlement of US-Iranian differences and proposed Istanbul as a venue for direct negotiations.
Baku, represented by President Ilham Aliyev and Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov, contacted their Iranian counterparts (President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi), expressing support for a peaceful resolution and assuring Tehran of its neutrality, pledging not to allow Azerbaijani territory to be used for a war against Iran.
In Yerevan, demonstrations by opponents of the Iranian regime in front of the Iranian Embassy did not face significant opposition, which drew a negative reaction from the Iranian ambassador.
Iran situation analysis: possible motives and prospects
There is a view that the non-accidental escalation of the case involving financier Jeffrey Epstein in the United States, who is allegedly linked to Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, could be part of a broader strategy. According to this version, Israel is using compromising materials against American officials to pressure Washington into agreeing to a military strike against Iran.
All the factors listed point to the real possibility of war breaking out against Iran at any moment. The more actively President Trump proclaims his commitment to a peaceful resolution of the Iranian crisis, the less credible these statements appear. In the summer of 2025, the US leader also assured the possibility of a political solution, but subsequent events showed that the US was likely only buying time to regroup its forces before striking, contrary to its promises.
Perhaps the demonstration of military force around Iran is Trump’s attempt to convey his terms for peace without war to Tehran, that is, to offer negotiations as an alternative to military action. But what are the key tenets of the peaceful settlement proposed by the United States and Israel?
If not letting Iran create nuclear weapons is the goal, then the following should be noted:
Firstly, Tehran has said numerous times that it does not aim to create nuclear weapons.
Secondly, in June 2025, the United States and Israel publicly declared that their “carpet bombings” of nuclear facilities in Natanz and Fordow had “shut down” the IRI’s nuclear program, eliminating the possibility of its revival in the foreseeable future. The question arises: how, in just six months, could Iran demonstrate the ability for such rapid recovery, akin to a phoenix, and acquire the necessary volumes of enriched uranium to create an atomic bomb?
Recently, the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, visited Moscow and delivered a message from Ali Khamenei to President Vladimir Putin. In it, Iran expressed readiness to negotiate with the US, proposing to freeze or halt nuclear development and transfer all its enriched uranium to Russia for safekeeping.
As for the demand to cease Iran’s support for armed Shi’a groups operating against Israel, following the 12-day war and the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, Tehran’s regional influence has weakened significantly. The IRGC no longer provides the same level of military assistance to anti-Israeli forces. Recently, representatives of the “Shi’a axis” criticized the “Sunni axis” for only rhetoric instead of tangible support for the Palestinians, as former Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif reminded.
Moreover, with the rise of a pro-Turkish proxy, Al-Sharaa, to power in Damascus, Israel began noting that Iran poses a lesser threat to the Jewish state than a Sunni Türkiye in alliance with Qatar and nuclear-armed Pakistan. Former Israeli National Security Council Secretary Yaakov Nagel, in January 2025 after Assad’s overthrow and Ankara’s strengthened position, prepared a report identifying the Sunni axis led by Türkiye as a more dangerous threat to Tel Aviv than Iran.
Regarding a potential change in the Iranian regime (for example, the restoration of the Shah or the rise of the “democrat” Pezeshkian instead of the clergy), this is an internal matter for Iranian society and is unlikely to be accepted by Tehran. The idea of reviving the Pahlavi monarchy has little future, and the figure of Pezeshkian, in the author’s opinion, lacks sufficient independence to transform the Islamic regime into a secular one.
Meanwhile, the talks scheduled for February 6 in Istanbul did not take place due to Iran’s refusal of the venue and request to move direct negotiations with the US to Oman. The reasons for Iran’s choice remain unclear. In this context, the statement by Saudi Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman during his visit to Washington – that President Trump’s refusal to strike Iran would only strengthen Tehran in the region – sounds highly provocative.
Alexander Svarants – PhD in Political Sciences, Professor, Expert in Turkish studies and on Middle Eastern Countries
No comments:
Post a Comment