Iran — Israel: War or peace? Expert opinions on Caliber.Az

Since the morning of June 24, the Middle East has been in a state of fragile peace, which carries significant risks of breaking into a new stage of escalation between Israel and Iran. Even after the ceasefire announced by US President Donald Trump, new rocket launches were recorded — from Iran targeting Israeli territory, and from Israel targeting Tehran.

Both sides have made statements summing up the confrontation. For example, the Supreme National Security Council of the Islamic Republic confidently declared that "Iran has defeated Israel, forcing it to acknowledge defeat and unilaterally cease aggression."

The Israeli government, in turn, announced that not only had it achieved all the objectives of Operation “Rising Lion,” but had even surpassed them. Specifically, it claimed to have neutralised the immediate existential dual threat from Iran — in both the nuclear and ballistic missile spheres — and warned that it would respond to any further strikes from Iran.

How will the situation develop going forward? What are the chances that the conflict between Israel and Iran will end in a long-term peace, or will the ceasefire — despite the presence of a high-profile mediator like Donald Trump — prove to be short-lived?

Caliber.Az posed these questions to an American political analyst and a Russian Middle East expert.

American analyst, geopolitical and security expert, and editor-in-chief of The Washington Outsider, Irina Tsukerman, believes that a key issue lies in the political ambitions of the United States, which tend to overshadow the real interests of actors in the Middle East — including Israel itself. “In a situation where a peace agreement was reached bypassing the Israeli government, and then immediately violated by the Iranian side — resulting in casualties in Be’er Sheva — it becomes necessary to reassess the fundamental principles of U.S. strategy in the Middle East,” she stated.

“First and foremost, context matters,” the political analyst noted. “The current U.S. foreign policy line is increasingly shaped less by its traditional strategic alliance with Israel, and more by an institutionalised approach to conflict management based on balancing interests rather than securing victory or defeat for any one side. This logic shifts away from the ‘friend–enemy’ paradigm and replaces it with a framework of ‘equitable stabilisation,’ where Israel — despite its historic and defence significance — is equated with other players, whether Iran or even proxy entities like Hamas or Hezbollah.

The establishment of a ceasefire without Israel’s official involvement points to a systemic crisis of trust between the allies. The U.S. essentially acted as an external moderator — a mediator between conflicting parties — rather than a party coordinating a joint strategy with its partner. Moreover, the deliberate exclusion of Israel from the diplomatic mechanisms leading to the ‘agreement’ undermined the legitimacy of any subsequent steps and exacerbated internal political divisions within Israel,” she said.

According to Russian political scientist, PhD in History, Middle East expert, and senior research fellow at the Institute of China and Contemporary Asia of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Anton Bredikhin, the peace that was announced and partially implemented does not yet signify the end of hostilities between Israel and Iran.

“I believe this act of goodwill from Iran will carry little weight for Israel, and its violation is quite likely. The Islamic Republic of Iran still has the means to respond to both the U.S. and Israel, even now. It is entirely possible that dormant cells operating within the United States may be activated, along with potential retaliatory acts. We’re already seeing various political forces in the U.S. actively exploiting this situation. As a result, martial law has been declared both at the national level and in certain U.S. states and regions,” the analyst suggested.

In his view, even if a peace agreement is reached, Iran will not abandon its nuclear programme.

“It may once again be frozen or removed from the public and political discourse, but it will continue to develop at the scientific level regardless. Therefore, to claim that Iran will back down and that Israel has ‘won’ is complete nonsense. Thinking that way is utterly misguided,” Bredikhin concluded.