Merchants of war: Why did Israel attack Iran?

This article lays bare the twisted choreography behind Israel’s assault on Iran, unmasking the coordinated deceit that unfolded under the guise of diplomacy. President Trump’s earlier assurance of a peaceful deal turned out to be smoke and mirrors, as Israel went full throttle with its strikes, exploiting cancelled negotiations as a smokescreen. Meanwhile, the West tiptoes around justice, sending weapons with one hand while offering hollow calls for de-escalation with the other. Iran, left out in the cold and cornered, now finds itself fighting not just for survival but dignity. The article goes deep into the unlikely historical alliance between Iran and Israel, revealing a rivalry not rooted in ideology but mutual recognition of power and ambition. What once was strategic cooperation has now turned into a fierce contest for regional dominance, with both nations believing they stand alone in a hostile neighborhood.

The author boldly argues that Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capability is no longer about posturing but a matter of survival. While Israel continues its unlawful preventive strikes and targeted assassinations, protected by America’s shielding veto, Iran is urged to arm itself not with rhetoric, but real deterrence. History is revisited with chilling clarity—the rejection of Iran’s most compromising nuclear deal proposal in 2003, the ongoing sanctions that choke its progress, and a Western agenda that seeks regime change by any means necessary. The narrative suggests two paths forward: either Iran sustains resistance and forces a negotiated peace or collapses under pressure, paving the way for Israel and its Gulf allies to dictate a future wrapped in illusion. Until then, Iran fights on, battered but not broken.

Overview:

The article provides a sharply analytical and politically charged examination of the Israel-Iran conflict, unraveling the deeper geopolitical motives behind Israel’s aggression. It challenges mainstream narratives by revealing the duplicity of Western powers and the calculated marginalization of Iran, while making a strong case for Iran’s right to self-defense through nuclear deterrence.

NOTES:

This article gives deep understanding of Middle Eastern geopolitics, nuclear diplomacy, regime change strategies and international law violations. It also highlights the shifts in alliance dynamics, realpolitik, and media manipulation that can be integrated into long-form essays or debates on global power politics. The article helps develop critical thinking and provides a clear example of how international legal norms are selectively applied, a theme often asked in CSS exams.

Relevant CSS subjects:

• International Relations
• Current Affairs
• Pakistan Affairs (due to regional implications)
• Governance and Public Policies
• US Foreign Policy
• Global Security Studies

Notes for beginners:

The article simplifies a very complex issue by showing how global powers often say one thing and do another. For example while America talks about peace, it sends missiles to Israel. Israel which already has nuclear weapons attacks Iran over fears it might develop them someday. This double standard is called “preventive self-defense,” which is illegal under international law. Iran once offered to give up its nuclear program entirely in 2003 in exchange for peace and end to sanctions, but the US refused to talk. Today, Iran feels it needs nuclear weapons to defend itself, especially as it sees other countries like Iraq and Libya attacked after disarming.

Facts and Figures:

• Israel and Iran were once allies during the Iran-Iraq war.
• Israel bombed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 with Iran’s indirect support.
• In 2003, Iran offered a comprehensive peace deal, including abandoning its nuclear program, which the US rejected.
• Israel is believed to have nuclear weapons, though it has never officially confirmed them.
• Iran has been under US-led sanctions for decades, crippling its economy.

To wrap up, This article is a searing reminder that in the theatre of global politics, power often trumps principle. Iran’s isolation in this unfolding saga serves as a symbol of resistance, but also a warning. Until the world learns to treat all nations by the same rules, wars like these will keep finding fuel. The writer’s voice stands firm, urging readers to see through the smokescreen and question the narratives handed down by those in power.

Difficult Words and Meanings:

• Platitudes – meaningless, overused statements (syn: clichés, ant: insights)
• Feigned – pretended, fake (syn: simulated, ant: genuine)
• Animosity – strong hostility (syn: enmity, ant: friendship)
• Deterrence – prevention by fear of consequence (syn: hindrance, ant: encouragement)
• Emasculated – weakened or deprived of strength (syn: weakened, ant: empowered)
• Subversive – intended to overthrow or undermine (syn: rebellious, ant: loyal)
• Conflagration – a large destructive conflict or fire (syn: inferno, ant: peace)
• Rhetoric – persuasive or insincere speech (syn: oratory, ant: silence)
• Stymied – hindered or blocked (syn: obstructed, ant: facilitated)
• Veto – official power to block decisions (syn: rejection, ant: approval)