LONDON – When President Trump uses the expression of victory, saying, “We destroyed, crushed and ended Iran’s nuclear project,” the message behind it contradicts reality and brings defeat. But when Iran declares its nuclear facility significantly damaged, it also has a contradictory message, and is one of the victories, and Iran will not be able to stop and pursue its profits.
The American statement reflects inability–a repetitive failure with key goals set but not achieved, and is only masked by such statements.
This happened in Yemen when Trump declared that he would release hell and end Yemen’s challenge in the Red Sea. However, seven weeks later, he declared victory without achieving his goal. Similarly, when he reached an impossible point in facing what he called the “Iranian threat,” he issued a statement reflecting the opposition of strength.
After experiencing and discovering true power balances on earth, a new equation was established. The threshold and momentum needed to start a new war has risen to the level where nuclear weapons are used only in the most extreme war madness under absolute despair.
This new ceiling presents new challenges to the west. It is to recognize a new balance of power on earth. This has also proven to be a failure after 45 years of sanctions that, despite a complete and comprehensive embargo, created to support this type of resilience.
Iran has been tested and it has become clear that it is impossible to eliminate its current shape, structure, orientation, and the inherent forces it possesses. At the regional level, there is a greater question here regarding the relationship between its impact and resistance to sharing Iranian orientation and local security goals and rejecting foreign intervention. Now that things have reached this point, what space does it occupy?
Some of the axis of resistance may have been weakened, but the threat reached the heart of Iran, and the axis of resistance had a theoretical excess of force, which was not tested.
After this test, things become clearer, especially as professional organizations in the US and Israeli eras, are sufficient to undermine other systems, through 40 years of accumulated intelligence reporting efforts. Despite the large disparity in military power and weapons, after this record-breaking war, the axis of resistance, although the image appears weaker, has been found to be more stable in terms of actual forces.
Now tested, it turns out to be more feared than before, not because of its recognition of excessive force, but because of its proven resilience. What remains now is true force, and if time is given to rebuild during peacetime, the area will shift to a new phase.
Another question arises: Can we adapt and address this new reality, behind the Israeli occupational entity, and behind the United States? They are unlikely tolerate it for a long time. These stupid actions can lead to other conflicts due to recklessness and impatience in asserting unilateral influence across the region.
They test the water and gradually try to enter into conflict as they do in Lebanon. This could lead to greater conflict at the level of dealing with the Islamic Republic.
Unexpected things can occur by US and Israeli occupational organizations. This can ultimately lead to its end, as it cannot withstand this type of conflict. Iran is emerging strongly, and in all components of resistance, it must boldly present a vision for the region.