ABNA24 - Announcing the ceasefire on the 40th day of the joint US-Israeli aggression on Iran showed that despite the maximum push to bring Iran to its knees, they have run into a dead end in their military operations against Iran. Concerning the ceasefire, its terms, and the situation after it, Alwaght talked to Ahmad Zarean, an Iranian West Asia affairs expert and head of Tehran-based Andisheh Sazan-e-Nour Institute for Strategic Studies. He has asserted that post-war Iran will be way different from that before war since this conflict has established its power regionally and internationally.
Q: What has made the US and Israeli regime accept the ceasefire?
Zarean: It should be noted that this truce was accepted by the Americans and messages were not traded with the Israeli regime for the cessation of fire and as we know a day after the ceasefire took effect, the Israeli regime barbarously bombed civilians in Lebanon, which was supposed to be part of the deal. So, this deal is accepted by the Americans and the Israelis are not contented with it.
Regarding the reasons why the Americans accepted the ceasefire, it should be noted that after the war began, the Americans believed they could achieve their objectives in a short time, overthrow the Islamic Republic of Iran, and bring to power a government aligned with themselves. They even assumed that if they failed to achieve this goal, they could pave the way for the collapse of the country, seize the oil‑rich regions themselves, and leave the rest of Iran engulfed in civil war. This was the objective the Americans had in mind.
However, in the war, not only was the Islamic Republic of Iran not overthrown, but also by regionalizing the conflict and closing the Strait of Hormuz, Tehran put the Americans in a tight spot. On the other hand, surging fuel and commodity prices in the US created widespread public dissatisfaction, and Washington was also pressured by its allies, since no country was willing to join the US in this war against Iran. Washington was unable to form a regional or international coalition for its anti-Iranian aggression. Therefore, the combination of these factors pushed the Americans to consider stopping the war in order to avoid further disgrace, especially after the claimed operation to rescue American pilots, which ultimately resulted in the destruction of several American aircraft.
So, the US accepted the ceasefire driven by despair, for a face-saving exit from the conflict. They tied the ceasefire to reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to this end.
Q: How likely is this ceasefire to succeed? Will it make an upgradable framework for cooperation or is it just a deal to stop the conflict?
Zarean: In general, this ceasefire should be looked at with pessimism, because less than 24 hours after its announcement, Washington set new terms. They were announced by the White House spokesperson. It was predicted that the Americans renege on their promises and feign excuses. We are seeing this treachery now that ceasefire is announced, and despite Iran's emphasis on cessation of hostilities on all fronts, the US is giving the Israelis a leeway in Lebanon, where hundreds of innocent civilians were martyred by Israeli airstrikes.
On the other hand, we have seen that Iran’s airspace was violated by the Israeli regime, and some Iranian islands such as Lavan and Siri in the Persian Gulf were also targeted by fighter jets. At the same time, the Americans have introduced a series of new demands, trying to pursue through negotiations the objectives they failed to achieve in the war. Therefore, one should be very pessimistic about the ceasefire. Even if this ceasefire continues, it cannot lead to a clear framework for ending hostilities, lifting sanctions, receiving compensation, or ensuring the safety of Iran’s allies from the aggression of the Israeli regime.
It is predicted that, in the most optimistic scenario, conditions similar to those after the 12‑day war will prevail, meaning a no war, no peace situation. The Americans will once again resort to threatening Iran, attempt to pressure the country, and maintain the shadow of war over Iran. Of course, Iran has a valuable trump card called the Strait of Hormuz, and given that Iran already controls navigation through the strait, this provides an appropriate tool through which Iran can assert its sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz and compensate for some of the damages caused by the war.
Ultimately, considering what we know about Trump, his personality, and his cabinet, and given the significant influence of the Zionist lobby and Netanyahu over Trump, and the fact that Netanyahu does not want the region to re-embrace stability and security, the most optimistic scenario is a post–12‑day‑war situation.
Q: How is post-war Iran different from pre-war Iran?
Zarean: During this war, Iran has emerged as a big power, displaying a magnificent resistance against the US. Actually, during this conflict with two allies, Iran managed to tip the scales in its favor and secure considerable battleground games, establishing its power.
Although the opposite sides claim certain tactical results, such as the assassination of the leadership, senior commanders, and scientists, as well as damaging some steel and petrochemical infrastructures, they have failed to achieve any strategic gains. Meanwhile, Iran has managed to secure strategic achievements.
The first achievement of the war is the consolidation of Iran’s sovereignty in the Strait of Hormuz. The next achievement for the Islamic Republic of Iran from the war is striking American bases in the region. Iran has managed to render these bases non-operational, and their inoperability for a long time will bring a form of security for Iran. In fact, Iran has been able to showcase its power to the world, and today, the world views Iran’s power differently. The narratives that were promoted against Iran through media and psychological operations, and which some hostile media had used to claim a rift between the people and the government, have all been invalidated. Iran has demonstrated that the people support their political system’s rule.
Another important achievement had been that Iran showed that security is not a purchasable commodity and it should be domestically developed and those lacking domestically developed security, including the Persian Gulf Arab monarchies, are highly vulnerable and on the other side Iran, which has domestic technology and security and high resilience rates and this is a crucial matter and in the future the people will ask the Islamic Republic to invest more broadly on the defense and security.
Q: How will the current ceasefire affect the balance of power in the region? Will Iran hold the narrative concerning regional developments after this ceasefire?
Zarean: The balance of power has shifted to Iran's advantage and Iran has emerged as a regional power, and after ceasefire and when conditions are back to normal, we should repair our ties with regional countries, especially Qatar and show them that Iran attacked targets inside them because they hosted American bases. If not for hosting the adversaries, Iran has no problem with its Arab neighbors. If we manage to establish a regional security mechanism without interference of foreign powers, it will be highly ideal.
/129
Your Comment