The joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran targeting nuclear facilities and symbolic state institutions are seen as a desperate attempt at regime change and upholding Israeli dominance. Israel’s surprise attack, orchestrated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, aims to derail US-Iran detente and serves Netanyahu’s agenda more than America’s interests. While the strikes caused damage, Iran’s swift response exposed vulnerabilities in Israel’s defenses, with Tehran anticipating and mitigating the attack on the Fordow enrichment plant. This event highlights the resilience of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and the futility of military escalation in resolving the issue.

The failure to incite mass revolt in Iran and Netanyahu’s support for an exiled figurehead reveal the shortcomings of the regime-change project. The US faces a divided national security team, with some advocating for renewed talks as coercion proves ineffective. Understanding Iran’s nuclear program as a tool for deterrence and leverage, rather than an ideological pursuit of weapons, is crucial for crafting a successful diplomatic approach. The current situation underscores the need for a strategic shift away from militaristic solutions and unwavering support for Israel, towards a balanced and realistic approach to regional stability.

The article calls for a reevaluation of US policy in the Middle East, emphasizing the limitations of coercion and the risks of aligning too closely with Israel’s confrontational stance. It advocates for a nuanced strategy that prioritizes diplomacy over military intervention and emphasizes regional equilibrium over unilateral support for any party. Ultimately, the article urges Washington to choose realism over fantasy in navigating the complexities of the Middle East to achieve lasting stability.