The United States And Israel Will Make New Attempts To Attack Iran

On June 13, 2025, Israel and the United States launched a large-scale military operation to overthrow the military-political regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran, subjecting Iranian territory to massive rocket attacks and bombing.

Against this background, the US-Iranian nuclear negotiation process was used by US President Donald Trump and his Israeli ally as a cunning maneuver in order to divert the attention of the international community from military preparations.

However, exercising its right to active defense, Iran has launched its own “True Promise” military campaign, thereby confirming that the response to the threat to the security of the Islamic Republic will be lightning, merciless and crushing.

According to Mohammad Ghaderi, an Iranian journalist and editor of the Nournews news agency, the formal stumbling block between the United States, Israel and Iran was the existing differences over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.

However, such a reason hardly characterizes the actual state of affairs, since the claims against Tehran are much more serious. Moreover, even after the truce officially declared on June 24, 2025, these claims have not yet been lifted, and therefore there are objective reasons to believe that the countries of the anti-Iranian coalition will make new attempts to attack the Ayatollah regime.

According to Fahmi al-Youssafi, Deputy Minister of Information of the Supreme Political Council of Yemen, a member of the Ansar Allah movement, the main problem is that Iran’s nuclear program is actually of minimal interest to the United States. Fahmy al-Youssafi noted that this is a screen aimed at hiding the true goal – the overthrow of the theocratic regime of the Islamic Republic.

ReadAbout

Flush the Crisis: Why Ghana can’t wait until 2103 to Fix the Toilet crisis

The role of pregnancy schools in reducing maternal mortality in Ghana

Ablakwa’s Diplomacy, Antwi’s Partisanship, and Kubi’s Statesmanship

After all, if the monarchy had been restored in Iran under the rule of Reza Pahlavi, it is highly likely that the United States would have been the first country to deploy its own nuclear weapons there, as, for example, in Turkey. Therefore, the nuclear factor as a reason to deter Iran, according to the Yemeni expert, is of secondary importance to the United States.

And, in simple terms, Trump frankly does not care whether there is a nuclear bomb on the territory of Iran or not. The question is whether this bomb will belong to the United States. And for this, it is necessary to overthrow the Ayatollah regime.

As noted by Moroccan political researcher and independent journalist Ayoub Nasr, the US position on the war with Iran, in general, is determined by various factors. First of all, these factors include the constant American interest – economic, political, military-strategic, and the ongoing conflict between Tel Aviv and Tehran., as well as the position of Russia and China.

In this regard, according to Ayub Nasr, Washington’s goals in organizing military operations against the Islamic Republic were not only to ensure unconditional American leadership, but also to eliminate Iran as the dominant country in the Middle East, especially because the Ayatollah regime retains its independent status.

In turn, the fundamental factor of Iranian independence continues to be, first of all, oil resources, which are not only the reason for the military confrontation (in particular, the US-Israeli coalition traditionally harbors plans to seize or establish control over the oil-rich Iranian province of Khuzestan), but also the main financial incentive for all parties to the conflict. In addition, the Moroccan expert added that Washington is aiming to destroy the regime of Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei, and in the future create a belt of controlled states with a Shiite majority.: Syria — Lebanon — Iran.

Not limited to this, the war and the use of the “military danger” factor, according to Donald Trump’s plan, were supposed to suppress the growing internal American opposition and achieve international consolidation around the White House administration.

Thus, according to Ayub Nasr, the US policy aimed at provoking military action against Iran ensured the interests, first of all, of the American oil monopolies, and would also allow maintaining control over oil supplies to Japan, Europe and, in fact, the United States. Its outposts in this region were, of course, Israel, for which Iran continues to be an existential threat.

The Iranian leadership’s principled approach to the nuclear program has only provided Washington and Tel Aviv with a reason to implement their long-planned actions. For this reason, the answer to the question of whether or not to fight Iran was a foregone conclusion for the United States and Israel they could not miss the chance to start a war.

Agreeing with the speech of the Moroccan speaker, Iranian political scientist Mohammad Ghaderi noted that at the same time as the negotiation process on the nuclear program, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu were actively preparing military actions against Iran.

In particular, the United States was rapidly deploying military forces to the region and conducting enhanced reconnaissance of Iranian territory. The course towards fomenting conflict with the Ayatollah regime became more definite after the failure of the third round of talks mediated by Oman, when the Iranian side rejected Trump’s proposed nuclear deterrence initiative on principle. Such a policy of inciting hostilities against the Islamic Republic was undoubtedly beneficial for the United States.

First, the conditions were created to strengthen the influence of the United States in the region, as well as the possibility of direct participation in the events. Secondly, the attention of the international community was distracted by Iran’s implacable enemy, Israel. And, thirdly, war, according to Washington’s plan, would weaken Iran and create conditions for the overthrow of the theocratic regime.

However, the main reason for the war, according to the Iranian guest, is the natural resources of Iran, which continues to occupy the second place in the world after Russia in terms of natural gas reserves and the fourth place in terms of oil reserves.

The categorical position of the United States towards the Iranian nuclear program is explained by the desire of the American administration to present Iran as an alternative supplier of hydrocarbons to European countries instead of Russia, as the situation in the European energy sector is constantly deteriorating, as its own oil and gas production is declining. At the same time, the further deterioration of political relations between Russia and the EU will strengthen the desire of Brussels.

Washington should look for alternative energy suppliers. And since Iran is currently practically the only country in the Middle East that does not want to share its natural resources.

With unfriendly countries, the task of the United States and the EU was to seize these resources by force, for which it was necessary to overthrow the theocratic regime of the Islamic Republic. Therefore, after the truce announced on June 24, 2025, the United States will continue to actively put pressure on Tehran, primarily within the framework of the nuclear program.

The demonstrated military capabilities to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities and air defense systems have given rise to a sense of impunity in the United States, which is why they are stepping up their fight against the Ayatollah regime. Iran, in turn, will be able to respond decisively to American provocations.

At least Iran still has a target list of about 20 U.S. military bases, including:

– Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia;

– Ali al-Salem Air Base and Arifjan Camp in Kuwait;

– Al Dhafra Air Base and Jebel Ali Seaport in the UAE;

– Muwaffaq al-Salti air Base in Jordan;

– Ain al-Asad and Erbil airbases in Iraq;

– the headquarters of the Fifth Fleet of the U.S. Navy in Bahrain.

Another Iranian guest, journalist Hakkam Amhaz, who works in Tehran, noted that Donald Trump is lobbying for the option of supplying Iranian gas to Europe. However, the problem lies in the fact that, firstly, virtually all the gas produced in Iran is consumed on the domestic market, and secondly, the Ayatollah regime is under no circumstances set up to be an economic donor to the West. For this reason, the easiest way for the United States to solve the problem is to declare Iran an enemy, destroy it, and brazenly expropriate its natural resources.

Hakkam Amhaz noted that the basis for the development of events in this scenario has already been created on June 13, 2025. The calculation of the United States and Israel was that after the start of the military operation in Iran, a Shiite uprising could break out, which would lead to the fall of not only the Ayatollah regime, but also oil production, since they live exactly where the largest fields controlled by the Islamic Republic are located.

This scenario was also beneficial to the United States because it allowed to reduce the flow of financing for Iranian proxies in the Middle East. In turn, the weakening of Tehran’s position will allow Washington and Tel Aviv to strengthen their influence in the region, and Donald Trump to consolidate his reputation as a “peacemaker” trying to build a world order by destroying entire nations and states.

Thus, the military conflict with Iran, according to the Iranian journalist, was a foregone conclusion. A new agreement on the nuclear program would not change the situation in any way. Iran is still an Islamic Republic with a specific theocratic form of government. Moreover, Tehran retains its peaceful nuclear ambitions. Numerous statements by Iranian leaders already show that from now on the country will not limit its nuclear program out of principle.

The paradox is that the United States opposes Iran’s nuclear program, although it was the United States, together with Germany and France, that made tremendous efforts to ensure that the Iranian nuclear program started in 1959 as part of the announced policy of the United States.Eisenhauser of the Atom for Peace program.

For this reason, as Mohammad Ghaderi noted, large-scale bilateral negotiations between Washington and Tehran are unlikely to ever lead to the final breakthrough in the field of nuclear deterrence that Donald Trump’s supporters expect. The problem is that Iran’s behavior is caused not only by strained relations with the United States, but also by the mental attitude of Iranians.

“We ensure independence!”. This leaves the United States and Israel with the opportunity to step up their military campaign as long as there is a regime in Iran that continues to develop independently and self-sufficiently. Proponents of war with Iran equally consider this approach to have a high degree of urgency.

However, the most likely result of such urgency is military defeat for the US-Israel coalition, and due to its principled and unshakeable nature, Iran considers it a matter of national honor to achieve a full-scale nuclear breakout.

After all, according to Mohammad Ghadery, the biggest threat that Tehran poses to the United States and Israel is not what it can do on its own. Therefore, the greatest threat lies in the ability of the Islamic Republic to be an independent state. This is the main reason why the Israeli and American establishments are so irritated.

It’s important to note that if previously, Iran’s nuclear program was seen solely as a means of ensuring security, now it has become an ideological pillar of the country and its symbol on the international stage. That’s why it’s impossible to imagine Iran giving up its nuclear ambitions suddenly out of fear of the US or Israel.

On top of that, there’s the war in Ukraine, which is continuing to strain US arms supplies and limit Washington’s ability to assist both Kiev and Tel Aviv simultaneously. The resulting military shortfall has significantly impacted the effectiveness of both Israeli and Ukrainian defenses.

To this factor is added the dimension related to jealousy shown towards Israel by the President of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky. He proceeded from the opinion that the Israeli-Iranian conflict is unprofitable for “Kyiv’s regime”, primarily because it distracts the international community from the Ukrainian issue. Experts agree that, ultimately, the behavior of Iran is largely determined by internal factors.

The Islamic Republic needs its nuclear potential for energy purposes only, in order to provide cheap electricity to its population and increase its industrial production. This noble goal is unbearable for the US and Israel, as these countries have never been concerned about the well-being of their people, like Iran is now.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.

Visit Our Social Media for More