Atef Abu Saif
The Iranian strike on Israel was an important development in the course of the ongoing wars waged by Israel in the region. However, the essence of the Iranian intervention must be viewed within Tehran’s efforts to advance its nuclear file, and its efforts to reach an agreement that allows it to continue its efforts, which have brought it closer than ever to possessing a nuclear weapon.
However, no one knows whether Israel will respond by bombing Iranian nuclear facilities, which Tel Aviv is already doing to a limited extent within understandings with Washington to avoid the outbreak of a comprehensive war, unless the two parties decide to settle accounts with the Supreme Leader’s regime, once and for all.
After the agreement was halted following Washington’s withdrawal from it, Tehran continued its efforts to enrich uranium and became closer to reaching the percentage that allows for the manufacture of nuclear weapons. It abandoned all the restrictions that were imposed on it, so the amount that the agreement did not want Tehran to possess was exceeded, and the percentage of purity was exceeded many times over. All of this is being done with extreme caution and amid fears of a sudden American strike or a surprise Israeli attack. Considering the lack of clarity regarding the future of relations with the West, despite the open discourse presented by the new President, Iran’s engagement in direct escalation is only one of its measures to break the existing deadlock, especially since its position has become stronger. This is because Russia has become willing to provide assistance and support to Iran to develop its capabilities in exchange for talk about Tehran providing clear support to Moscow in the field of drones and some combat supplies.
Iranian nuclear file
The Iranian nuclear file has been pending for years and has been in need of movement since negotiations regarding it stopped, especially after the Trump administration withdrew from the agreement in 2015. Nothing has happened since and, despite its efforts to develop its capabilities, Tehran remained controlled by potential reactions.
Now, for Tehran, it is time to settle the matter once and for all. Its involvement in the war, even though limited bombing in response to the assassination on its soil and the assassination of its main ally in Beirut, could be presented as legitimate, but it will open a discussion about its strategic role and position in the region, including the opportunities to develop its nuclear capabilities. It is as if it wants to say: You cannot bomb Tehran and engage in a war with us to deter us from possessing a nuclear weapon; it is better if you come speak with us, instead. This is a message to the West, because the West, with Washington at its heart, is the one imposing sanctions that are straining the economy and the situation in Iran.
Iran has expressed its readiness to resolve the crisis on more than one occasion. In fact, Iranian President Pezeshkian expressed his country’s hope to resolve the matter during his speech before the UN General Assembly, which is also something he expressed in all his meetings with European officials on the sidelines of the same meetings. While some may see this desire to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis as part of the new president’s position, as he is looking to revive the economy that has been exhausted by years of sanctions and restrictions imposed on Iran, the truth is that Iran wants to push its file forward a little to get closer to its completion.
Although Pezeshkian made an attempt to court the US and the West, he wants to overcome the proverbial horse of the nuclear file and make it difficult to go back. What we do know is that the matter is ultimately not in the hands of the President, but in the hands of the Supreme Leader, who may allow the President to manoeuvre and use soft diplomacy to gain more time to achieve the nuclear dream.
Strategic aspirations
As for Iran, its position in the region and its role in its conflicts reflect its strategic aspirations, which are not up for debate in the eyes of the religious regime that has placed the "exportation” of the revolution as a model of Islamic rule at the core of its goals.It also aims to encourage Islamic countries to follow in the footsteps of the Supreme Leader, describing what it is doing as a revival of the rule of the Prophet’s family.
In this context, we can understand Iran’s insistence on being a party to the ongoing war, even before it bombed Israeli sites and some buildings. Through its rhetoric, Tehran has made itself part of the war, as in many speeches and statements by its religious, political or army leaders, it supports the organisations fighting on all fronts, whether in Gaza, Lebanon or Yemen, despite trying more than once to avoid claims that the Yemeni missiles are Iranian-made or originate from there. Simply put, Iran wants to be part of what is happening because it wants to be part of the outcomes.
For the West, this may not be difficult or impossible, but it will be for Trump, if he returns to the White House. However, we do not expect Kamala Harris to easily accept the option of Iranian force. No one wants an all-out regional war to break out for fear that it will go from a regional war to an international and global war, even if limited. Everyone wants to contain the situation and think about how to defuse it. The situation that preceded the war may seem like the best scenario to go back to, but it will have to include a return to negotiations on the Iranian nuclear file and allowing Iran to make a little progress in the matter. However, the problem in this regard is not in the West, but in Washington and Tel Aviv.
While we must wait for the Israeli response to the Iranian strike because it will certainly be fully coordinated with Washington in terms of the level of response and the targeted locations, in light of the latter’s efforts to contain the matter for fear of a wider war, what is certain is that Iran will be an important part of the outcomes of the war raging in the region, and the war cannot be settled without reaching an agreement with it. In addition, the Iranian nuclear project and its future will witness a significant transformation, regardless in which direction, through which Tehran seeks to advance towards possessing nuclear weapons.
(Atef Abu Saif is a Palestinian writer who teaches Political Science at the University of Al-Azhar, Gaza, and is Chief Editor of Siyasat magazine, published by the Public Policy Institute in Ramallah)