The consequences of US and Israeli military attacks will haunt the
region, and beyond, for years to come. Here, I will highlight the key
consequences of such an attack.
Netanyahu's trap
There is no doubt that Israel coordinated its attack on Iran with the
US, Europe, and Nato, and continued the war with their direct and
indirect support. Netanyahu has been trying to drag the US into a war with Iran since the 1990s, but all US presidents avoided such a trap.
Under Netanyahu's pressure, Trump killed the Iran nuclear deal, which was adopted by UN Security Council Resolution 2231, during his first term and launched a military strike against Iran's nuclear sites just months into his second term.
Netanyahu praised Trump's decision to attack Iran. "Congratulations,
President Trump. Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities
with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change
history," he said.
Ironically, the attack came after Trump's special envoy, Steve
Witkoff, and Iranian Foriegn Minister Abbas Araghchi agreed that the
first three rounds of nuclear talks in Oman and Italy could be a
credible base for an agreement.
An informed Iranian source told me: "The key elements of the deal
between Witkoff and Araghchi were agreed upon over three rounds of
negotiations in Muscat and Rome. The deal was as follows: Iran would
accept maximum nuclear inspections and transparency, including
implementation of the Additional Protocol and Subsidiary Arrangements
Code 3.1 - the highest international mechanisms for inspecting a
country's nuclear programme."
The source added: "Second, Iran would convert or export its existing
stockpile of 60-percent enriched uranium, which is sufficient to build
10 nuclear bombs. Third, Iran would halt its current high-level
enrichment at 60 percent and 20 percent and reduce it to the level of
civil purposes, which is 3.67 percent. Finally, Iran would fully
cooperate with the IAEA to resolve all technical ambiguities.
"In return, the United States would lift the nuclear-related
sanctions. It was agreed that the technical teams of both sides would
draft the final agreement based on these four points. But suddenly,
after a call between Netanyahu and Trump, the American side stopped
sending its technical team to Muscat and, in a 180-degree shift in its
position, demanded the complete shutdown of Iran's peaceful enrichment
programme.
"This shift delayed the agreement until Trump's two-month deadline
expired - and while the sixth round was set for day 63, Israel launched
an attack on Iran on day 61. This was Israel's trap - designed to drag
the US and Trump into a war with Iran."
Israel's failure
Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the EU's high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, Kaja Kallas, held talks with Araghchi on Friday and agreed to meet again within a week.
The E3/EU ministers were encouraged to meet the Iranian foreign minister because on 19 June, Trump gave a two-week window for diplomacy.
"Last week, we were in negotiations with the US when Israel decided
to blow up that diplomacy. This week, we held talks with the E3/EU when
the US decided to blow up that diplomacy. What conclusion would you
draw?" Araghchi wrote to Britain and the EU High Representative.
Israel, the only country in the Middle East that actually possesses
nuclear weapons, cannot credibly claim to be fighting against nuclear
proliferation
The US decision to attack Iran shows that Israel not only failed in
its 10-day military operation against Tehran, but was on the verge of
defeat. Why would the US intervene if Israel had not been in a crisis?
Israel, the only country in the Middle East that actually possesses
nuclear weapons, with as many as 400 nuclear bombs according to some
estimates, cannot credibly claim to be fighting against nuclear
proliferation.
Moreover, all reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) and US intelligence agencies over the past 20 years have
consistently confirmed that there is no evidence of the Iranian nuclear programme pursuing weaponisation.
"We do not have at this point, if you ask me, at this time, any
tangible proof that there is a programme, or a plan, to fabricate, to
manufacture a nuclear weapon," said the UN nuclear chief.
The key point is that there was no immediate and serious threat. The
claim that Iran has enough enriched stockpiles to build 10 bombs in two
weeks is only half the truth.
The other half is that - even if Iran decided to build a bomb - it
would take them one to two years to develop the delivery systems, such
as nuclear warheads. "There was no imminent threat that Iran was
weaponising its nuclear programme before Israel's attack began," according to the American Arms Control Association.
NPT: A political tool
This is the first time that two nuclear-armed countries have launched a military attack on a non-nuclear country.
This demonstrates that the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), specifically for the US and Israel, has merely been used as a political tool.
"Israel was not attacked by Iran - it started that war; the United
States was not attacked by Iran - it started this confrontation at this
point," said Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy
Institute.
The US military attack on Iran is a clear violation of the UN
Charter. "The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations
Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the UN Charter,
international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear
installations," said the Iranian foriegn minister.
Trump's national security team either failed to properly assess the
consequences of a US military attack on Iran, or they were unable to
dissuade Trump.
A new nuclear strategy
In any case, this event has further revealed the extent of Netanyahu's influence over the White House.
"This war was provoked by Benjamin Netanyahu for his own political
survival, and Donald Trump has willingly handed him American military
power to prolong it. The United States is not anyone's proxy army, and
our troops are not bargaining chips," said Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman.
It is only natural that following the US military attack, Iran would
reconsider its nuclear strategy, including its continued membership in
the NPT
The prespective from Tehran is that the attacks by these two
nuclear-armed countries revealed that the NPT not only has no real
value, but is in fact harmful. Countries like North Korea, India,
Pakistan and Israel, that rejected the treaty and developed nuclear
weapons have remained immune from military attacks by nuclear weapons.
It is only natural that following the military attack by Israel and
the United States, Iran would reconsider its nuclear strategy, including
its continued membership in the NPT.
Iran has suffered irreparable damage, but the negative consequences
of this attack are not limited to Iran alone - they will also harm the
United States and jeopardise regional peace and security. The current
war may have no clear winner or loser.
Instead, both Iran and Israel, along with the US, face the prospect
of mutual destruction, regional destabilisation and long-term national
trauma. In such a scenario, all parties would lose far more than they
could ever gain.
The international community must act decisively to deescalate the
situation. Failure to do so risks plunging the Middle East - and
possibly beyond - into a catastrophic conflict.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.