West Asia has experienced numerous crises in recent years. However, the process that started with the joint attack by the USA and Israel against Iran has a different nature than previous crises.
This war is not just a military conflict between two states. It is a multi-layered geopolitical breaking point ranging from energy security to global trade routes, and from financial markets to great power competition. For this reason, it is necessary to evaluate what is happening not only as a regional war but also as part of the transformation of the global system.
To read this article in the following languages, click theTranslate Websitebutton below the author’s name.
中文, Türkçe, Русский, Español,Portugues,Français, عربي, Hebrew, Deutsch, Farsi, Italiano, 日本語,한국어, Српски. And 40 more languages.
The picture that emerged from the first days of the war is extremely controversial in terms of legitimacy. While diplomatic negotiations with Iran were continuing, a military operation was launched.
This shows that the discourse of the “rules-based international order,” established after the Second World War and defended by the West for years, has in fact collapsed. When the relationship of trust between diplomacy and military power disappears, the international system loses its meaning.
As a matter of fact, even the discourse of the US administration regarding the goal of the war reflects this uncertainty. On the one hand, regime change was initially presented as an objective and later it was announced that this was not the goal. On the other hand, the Iranian people were openly called upon to rise up under any circumstances. On another day, it was stated that the purpose of the operation was only to limit Iran’s military capacity. These contradictory statements show that the strategic goals in Washington are not clear.
Surveys reveal that only about 25 percent of the American people support the war. This rate is one of the lowest levels of support for a war in modern American history. In particular, the events in Gaza and the military operations carried out by Israel have created serious reactions in Western public opinion. Younger generations in the United States no longer form a social base that automatically supports global military interventions. As the effects of the interruption of energy flows in the Gulf begin to be felt by American consumers, the level of criticism directed at Trump will increase. At the same time, the impact of the Epstein files on American public opinion has raised questions about the legitimacy of this war, and the thesis that Trump initiated the war in order to reduce the pressure created by the Epstein files should not be ignored.
An important dimension of the Iran-Israel tension is the transformation of hybrid war into open conflict. Since 2007, assassinations of nuclear scientists and military officials in Iran have gradually increased. The purpose of these operations was to delay Iran’s nuclear program, weaken its scientific and military command structure, and create psychological deterrence against Iran. In the attacks on June 13, 2025, this method reached a much more advanced level. Micro-kamikaze drones, precision-guided munitions, and high-tech special weapon systems were used in the operations. Such operations show that we have entered a new era in which the land, air, cyber, and cognitive domains of modern warfare are used together. Perception operations and propaganda have also become an important part of the war. While Western media constantly produces a narrative that Iranian society will collapse, the fact that large protests in Iran took place in support of the regime has shown that this narrative does not reflect reality.
On the other hand, USSecretary of WarPete Hegsethsays that Iran has been almost completely destroyed and that the war is coming to an end. Trump also claims that the war will be a quick and easy victory. The Iranian administration does not confirm this picture.Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchiannounced that they do not want a ceasefire and will not negotiate with the USA. When asked about the possibility of a ground operation by Trump, he laughed and challenged the idea by saying, “Let them come, we are waiting.” If Iran’s military capacity had truly been destroyed, it would be rational for Iran to seek a ceasefire. Iran’s refusal to negotiate shows that its capacity to fight has not completely disappeared.
Source: Global Research
