context: The Israel–Iran conflict entered a seventh day on 20 June, with Israeli airstrikes targeting Iran's nuclear facilities and Iranian Revolutionary Guard attacks on Israeli cities and military bases, resulting in thousands of casualties. Trump hints at potential talks with Iran while stating he'll decide 'within two weeks' whether to join Israel's attacks. The US has been sending increasingly stern messages to Iran and providing military support to Israel, though the extent of direct US involvement remains unclear. This op-ed is by Liu Zhongmin 刘中民 Shanghai International Studies University's Middle East Research Institute director.
goals and differences
Both the US and Israel aim to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities, but they differ on regime change. Liu argues that Israel lacks the capacity to overthrow Iran's Government given Iran's size (90 million people, 1.6 million km²), while the US is wary of another prolonged Middle Eastern war.
Iran's response
Despite initial setbacks and leadership losses, Iran remains functional and has organised effective retaliation. Supreme Leader Khamenei has declared readiness to defend Tehran, whilst President Pezeshkian has reiterated Iran's peaceful nuclear intentions.
conflict duration
The conflict appears likely to continue, with both sides in a 'game of chicken'. Iran may have advantages in a prolonged war due to its larger size and strategic depth, whilst Israel's smaller territory makes it more vulnerable to sustained attacks.
nuclear question
Iran faces a difficult choice between pursuing nuclear weapons (which would invite further attacks) or seeking diplomatic solutions (unlikely under current US policy). Liu suggests Iran's window for developing nuclear weapons may have closed due to international attention and potential airstrikes.
outlook
Liu predicts none of the three parties will fully achieve their goals, and the conflict may end when all sides realise their objectives are unattainable and Israel can no longer bear the costs of prolonged warfare.