09/06/2026
by Trita Parsi
For the first time in decades, a regional power dares to militarily confront Israel's aggressive actions against third parties.
Picture: Israeli settler stands next to a missile fragment embedded in the ground, following Iran's attacks, in the central area of the Israeli occupation in the West Bank, June 8, 2026 [Naama Stern - Reuters]
This is the first time Iran has struck Israel following an Israeli attack on the territory of a third country, meaning not in Iran itself.
This marks a significant shift in the boundaries of the conflict.
Iran's deterrent power had already, to some extent, been restored, as Israel knew that any strike against it would provoke retaliation.
But now, Tehran has demonstrated that it is willing to respond even to Israeli attacks against Lebanon.
It is the first time in decades that a regional power possesses not only the means and operational capabilities but also the political will to militarily confront Israel's moves or aggressive actions against third parties.
This fact gains particular importance at a time when Trump has hinted that he wishes to restrain Israel from further escalation.
According to reports, Trump told Israeli journalist Barak Ravid:
"I hope Israel doesn't retaliate. If Bibi hits them again, this cycle will continue — as it has for 47 years, or even 3,000 years." He also added:
"We are very close to a final deal with Iran. It will be a good deal. I don't want it to collapse because of what's happening now."
Whether this new dynamic will extend to the Palestinian issue remains uncertain. If it does, however, it may fundamentally change the balance of power.
For decades, Israel has managed to annex territories and commit war crimes without high cost, because the West refused to impose consequences, while no regional power possessed the necessary military strength to impose a counterbalance.
If this equation changes, then the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will likely enter an entirely new phase.
That is why Israel will try by all means to prevent any alteration of this balance.
From the US perspective, support for Israel at this moment amounts to a reaffirmation of the long-standing American strategy in the Middle East: maintaining a regional order that ensures almost absolute Israeli superiority.
This policy has proven extremely detrimental to American interests themselves, has contributed to the destabilization of the region, and has encouraged Israel to act increasingly aggressively and recklessly, knowing that it essentially faces no consequences.
And as problematic as it has been until now, it will become even more difficult and destabilizing going forward, as maintaining Israeli dominance in the region will require continuous confrontation — perhaps even war — with Iran. Such a scenario directly conflicts with American interests.
If American foreign policy were truly guided by US interests, then disengagement from the Middle East and its regional rivalries would be an almost obvious choice.
Trita Parsi, Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute and award-winning author, is listed — according to Washingtonian magazine — among the 25 most influential personalities in foreign policy. Noam Chomsky has described him as "one of the most important experts internationally on Iran-related issues."
According to reports, Trump told Israeli journalist Barak Ravid:
"I hope Israel doesn't retaliate. If Bibi hits them again, this cycle will continue — as it has for 47 years, or even 3,000 years." He also added:
"We are very close to a final deal with Iran. It will be a good deal. I don't want it to collapse because of what's happening now."
Whether this new dynamic will extend to the Palestinian issue remains uncertain. If it does, however, it may fundamentally change the balance of power.
For decades, Israel has managed to annex territories and commit war crimes without high cost, because the West refused to impose consequences, while no regional power possessed the necessary military strength to impose a counterbalance.
If this equation changes, then the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will likely enter an entirely new phase.
That is why Israel will try by all means to prevent any alteration of this balance.
From the US perspective, support for Israel at this moment amounts to a reaffirmation of the long-standing American strategy in the Middle East: maintaining a regional order that ensures almost absolute Israeli superiority.
This policy has proven extremely detrimental to American interests themselves, has contributed to the destabilization of the region, and has encouraged Israel to act increasingly aggressively and recklessly, knowing that it essentially faces no consequences.
And as problematic as it has been until now, it will become even more difficult and destabilizing going forward, as maintaining Israeli dominance in the region will require continuous confrontation — perhaps even war — with Iran. Such a scenario directly conflicts with American interests.
If American foreign policy were truly guided by US interests, then disengagement from the Middle East and its regional rivalries would be an almost obvious choice.
Trita Parsi, Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute and award-winning author, is listed — according to Washingtonian magazine — among the 25 most influential personalities in foreign policy. Noam Chomsky has described him as "one of the most important experts internationally on Iran-related issues."
No comments:
Post a Comment