The situation has escalated into a tense aerial stand-off, with both sides trading strikes almost daily and no sign of it letting up. What’s particularly worrying is Iran’s blunt warning to the United States, France and Britain that if any of them so much as lift a finger to support Israel, their military bases in the region could be next. And let’s not pretend that Israel is acting in complete isolation. To suggest that they launched such a bold attack without at least a nod or a calculated silence from their closest ally, the United States, is naive. Washington doesn’t even need to give tacit approval. All they need to do is look away. That deliberate silence, that studied disinterest, is enough. It’s the sort of turning away that says: “Do what you must. We’d rather not know.” The dark hands of Washington are rarely absent in Middle Eastern geopolitics.
Why did this flare-up happen now, of all times? Perhaps it’s no coincidence that it came on the heels of stalled talks between the US and Iran over the dismantling of the latter’s nuclear programme. What better way to send a message than through a so-called “ally”? The subtext is loud and clear: refuse to play ball, and you’ll be bombed into submission. Israel may have pressed the button, but it sure looks like Washington was in the war room too.
Now, I’m not here to pick sides. Frankly, I don’t care what Israel or Iran do to each other. But I do care when their war begins to affect the rest of us. The world is already struggling with rising inflation, fuel price volatility and the aftershocks of Donald Trump's ongoing tariff games. The last thing we need is a new conflict to throw another wrench into an already fragile global system. Spare the rest of us the fallout from your dangerous games!
POSTSCRIPT: Below is an extract from a BBC story by Lyse Doucet, one of their senior correspondents that I'm quite familiar with, on their website today. The story, "Where is Israel's operation heading?" had these few pointed paragraphs:
Iran's negotiators now suspect that the talks, which were set to resume in the Omani capital Muscat on Sunday, had all been a ploy to convince Tehran an Israeli attack was not imminent, despite mounting tensions. Israel's blistering salvos on Friday morning caught it off guard.
Others also see the timing as significant. "Israel's unprecedented strikes were designed to kill President Trump's chances of striking a deal to contain the Iranian nuclear programme," says Ellie Geranmayeh, deputy head of the Middle East and North Africa programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations.
"While some Israeli officials argue that these attacks aimed to strengthen the US leverage in the diplomatic path, it is clear their timing and large-scale nature was intended to completely derail talks."
Officials with knowledge of these negotiations had told me last week that "a deal was within reach". But it all depended on the US moving away from its maximum demand for Iran to end all nuclear enrichment, even from much smaller single-digit percentages commensurate with a civilian programme. Tehran viewed that as a "red line".
After President Trump pulled out of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal in his first term, partly under repeated urging from Netanyahu, Iran moved away from its obligation to restrict enrichment to 3.67% - a level used to produce fuel for commercial nuclear power plants - and started stockpiling too.
In this second attempt, the US leader had given Iran "60 days" to do a deal – a window viewed by mediators with experience and knowledge of this field as far too small for such a complex issue.
Israel attacked on the 61st day.
No comments:
Post a Comment