It's fire, it's fury, it's for real: What happens next as Middle East teeters on edge of destruction

News.com.au

6 hours ago

It's fire. It's fury. It's for real.
Israeli strike jets are pounding nuclear production sites. Iranian missiles are crashing down on cities. US aircraft carrier battle groups and aerial tankers streaming towards the Middle East.
And hundreds of thousands of civilians are fleeing for the hills.
All of these things have happened before.
Just not always all at once.
And not with US President Donald Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in charge.
Together, the three world leaders (with more than a bit of help from Russia's President Vladimir Putin and China's Chairman Xi Jinping) have changed the world.
It certainly is change.
But perhaps not as they want it.
Strategic analysts fear each leader has talked himself into a corner.
They're all stuck in their own 'commitment trap'.
All sides face wildly escalating threats.
And that includes steep personal costs.
'Under this dynamic, neither side can step back without accepting an intolerable outcome,' warns University of Pennsylvania nuclear security analyst Dr Farah Jan.
'For Israel, an Iran more determined than even in becoming a nuclear weapons nation capable of deterring Israeli action and ending its regional military dominance; for Iran, the risk of regime change through devastating Israeli strikes.
'The consequences of this deadly logic extend far beyond the Middle East.'
President Trump, true to his signature style, remains a wildcard.
Hundreds of thousands turned out on US streets in 'No Kings' protests as the President's birthday military parade grimly marched on under rain and ridicule. His 'day one' promise to end the war in Ukraine has been abandoned. His promise to find two trillion dollars in budget savings has become another enormous blowout. Now, his much-hyped 'deal' with Iran is in flames.
'Iran should have signed the deal I told them to sign,' he stated on Truth Social. 'What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!'
That evacuation order was not his, however.
It came from Israel's Netanyahu – drawing on his prior successes in generating civil chaos in Gaza.
But, with Iran continuing to launch retaliatory missile strikes and refusing to back down, both Netanyahu and Trump face a growing reality: The Law of Unintended Consequences.
Brave new world
'The trajectory of the conflict appears bleak,' warns Nuclear Threat Initiative analyst Eric Brewer. 'Israel has set back but not ended Iran's nuclear program. It now seems focused on trying to destabilise and eventually end the regime. Iran is not likely to go quietly, and there is a significant risk that the United States will also become embroiled in the war.'
Israel's audacious attacks against Iran began with the rogue nation's nuclear program directly in its sights.
It has since broadened that to include government officials, airports and television stations.
World leaders, including those assembling in Canada for the G7 summit of leading world economies, have demanded an immediate de-escalation to avoid all-out war.
Netanyahu, however, overnight insisted he was 'changing the face of the Middle East'.
Will it soon glow in the dark?
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned today there is a possibility of chemical and radiological contamination coming out of the Iranian nuclear processing facility at Natanz. It added it had not detected this yet, though.
The IDF (Israeli Defence Force) now asserts it has 'full aerial superiority' over Tehran and much of the country. But its F-35 Stealth Fighters and F-15 Strike Eagles are incapable of doing more than scratch the surface of the bunkers (and mountains) housing Iran's most prized nuclear and missile assets.
Netanyahu has another option.
Israel itself possesses nuclear weapons manufactured outside the scope of international treaties and agreements. Combined with orders for Tehran's 330,000 residents to evacuate, social media speculation surged.
Israeli Minister of Defence Israel Katz fanned the flames by declaring on social media that 'the Iranian propaganda and incitement mouthpiece is on its way to disappear,' adding that the 'evacuation of nearby residents has begun'.
But Israel's free-roaming airstrikes and sabotage teams may have unintended consequences: an 'inherently unstable escalation spiral'.
'Iran increasingly believes it cannot deter Israeli aggression without nuclear weapons, yet every step toward acquiring them invites more aggressive Israeli strikes,' Dr Jan notes. 'Israel, for its part, cannot permanently eliminate Iran's nuclear knowledge through military means – it can only delay it through means that would seemingly guarantee future Iranian determination to acquire the ultimate deterrent.'
Regimes of change
'The widespread nature of Israel's assault, which included attacks against senior Iranian officials and energy infrastructure, may convince Iran that Israel is targeting the regime itself, not pushing Iran toward a nuclear deal,' warns Brewer.
Ayatollah Khamenei, like Trump and Netanyahu, faces pressures at home.
His attempt to turn Iran into a religious state has been enthusiastically embraced – by secret police, religious militias and the military. But not so much by his general public. Killings over mild indiscretions, such as a schoolgirl not wearing her hijab in the officially proscribed fashion, have resulted in widespread discontent.
It's a weakness Netanyahu seeks to exploit. He appealed to Iran, as an old ally under the Biblical king Cyrus the Great, to rise against the regime. (Trump has also been linked to Cyrus – as the unwitting foreign leader unintentionally doing god's work for him.)
'In his address aimed directly at the Iranian people, Netanyahu described the Israeli operation as 'clearing the path' for the overthrow of the regime,' notes Brewer. 'If Iran believes that there are no restraints on Israel's violence, then it has little incentive to make a deal.'
Like Khamenei and Trump, Netanyahu is also in trouble at home.
His Likud political party isn't popular enough to keep him in power. So he needs the support of far-right religious-nationalist parliamentarians, including the recently sanctioned ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.
Another no-confidence vote in this administration has this week been sidelined because of the war. As have ongoing attempts to put the Prime Minister in front of court over long-standing corruption charges.
Meanwhile, Israeli citizens in Haifa have been detained by police for daring to wear 'No War' t-shirts.
Then there's President Trump.
Like Khamenei and Netanyahu, he's got trouble at home on his mind.
'The US is facing a crisis point on whether the current government and political process is capable of coping with or anticipating one or more potential hot spots exploding at home and abroad,' argues Atlantic Council analyst Dr Harlan Ullman,
'especially if protests over ICE and immigration spread across the nation and one of the overseas conflicts escalates uncontrollably.'
He says many commentators are highlighting similarities between now and shortly before the 1850s US Civil War and 1914 before World War I,
'Since World War II, the US has confronted simultaneous crises at home and abroad. Protests over Vietnam and civil rights enforcement during the 1950s and 60s turned violent,' he explains. 'The US has fought at least four major wars and one major campaign since World War II — Korea, Vietnam, Iraq twice and Afghanistan … The record has not been a good one.'
And there's little indication the White House is in any better position than in the past.
'At this stage, a great deal could go very wrong,' Ullman concludes.
A nuclear world
'Both Trump and Netanyahu believe they have a unique destiny to lead their nations at this hour—but both leaders face a public that is deeply divided about the wisdom of their policy choices,' argues Atlantic Council analyst Thomas Warrick.
'Both are gamblers and will double down when they are convinced they are right.
'It is inconceivable, therefore, that Trump would ever pressure Netanyahu to end the war short of what it will take to assure Israel's security.'
But this time, the conflict is different.
It's nuclear.
'Israel's conflict with Iran represents far more than another Middle Eastern crisis – it marks the emergence of a dangerous new chapter in nuclear rivalries that has the potential to reshape global proliferation risks for decades to come,' warns Dr Jan.
'The international community is witnessing the collapse of traditional deterrence frameworks in real-time.'
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian isn't reading from the same script as Prime Minister Netanyahu. Nor President Trump.
He's vowed to rebuild any damaged nuclear refinement infrastructure. And Iran's parliament is sitting in an emergency session to debate abandoning its membership of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty altogether. (Israel never signed it).
'(This) underscores that Israeli action designed to prevent nuclearization may instead result in Iran pursuing it with renewed determination,' Dr Jan adds.
And Trump and Netanyahu have given Khamenei little reason to believe that abandoning his uranium enrichment program will solve his problems.
'There's a significant risk that Iran believes that the US efforts to negotiate a deal were simply a ruse—a delaying tactic for Israel to prepare its military attack,' Dr Brewer argues.
Whether or not this is true doesn't really matter.
'Regardless of Trump's intentions, what matters most now is perception,' argues Royal United Services Institute analyst Dr Julie Norman.
'At best, the US will be seen as giving Israel a 'plausible denial green light' to undertake the operation. At worst, the talks will be viewed as intentional cover for Israel to land a surprise blow; this perception could have serious ramifications for US diplomacy more broadly, including on Gaza.'
More shock and awe?
'Trump has added fuel to the fire by calling Israel's strikes 'excellent' and warning Iran of 'more to come,' seemingly seeking credit for an attack he publicly opposed,' Dr Norman argues.
'As the situation escalates, it is uncertain how far Washington will get involved, whether by choice or necessity.'
What is certain is that dozens of United States Air Force (USAF) tanker aircraft have been seen streaming into Europe and onward towards the Middle East.
These aircraft are needed to sustain long-distance air strikes by the US (or Israel) deep into the heart of Iran.
'It is impossible to predict at this point how the war will evolve, let alone conclude,' warns Brewer. 'But chances are good that Israel's attack on Iran will not have the effect that Trump hopes. Instead, it will make reaching a diplomatic agreement harder and increase the chances that Iran eventually builds a nuclear weapon.'
Netanyahu, at the weekend, promised that the current round of strikes on Iran was 'nothing compared to what they will feel in coming days'.
He knows that if he backs down, he – and Israel – must accept a nuclear-armed Iran.
That's unacceptable in the face of his 'existential threat' rhetoric.
'Netanyahu sees a narrow window to eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat and does not believe that the Iranian regime will ever agree to the kind of deal Trump wants,' argues Warwick. 'For Netanyahu, war now was the only option.'
Ayatollah Khamenei's choice is similarly stark: Remain vulnerable to attack at Israel's whim? Or seize the strength offered by 'mutually assured destruction'?
Dr Jan says President Kim Jong-un's experience makes the second outcome most likely.
'Despite decades of sanctions and military threats, Pyongyang's nuclear program has made it essentially immune to preventive strikes,' she explains. 'Iranian leaders understand this lesson well – the question is whether they can reach the same protected status before suffering decisive preventive action.'
Can Israel alone produce the necessary firepower for decisive action?
Or must President Trump pitch in?
'This creates 'use it or lose it' dynamics,' Dr Jan warns. 'Israel faces shrinking windows to act preventively as Iran approaches weaponization; Iran faces incentives to accelerate its program before suffering additional strikes.'
Trump has already pivoted from being the 'President for Peace' to 'Peace through Power'.
Will 'bombing the hell out of (Iran)' be next?
'Two months ago, I gave Iran a 60-day ultimatum to 'make a deal',' Trump posted to his personal social media company, Truth Social. 'They should have done it!'
It will be a popular line for some Republican war hawks.
But not all MAGA (Make America Great Again) cheerleaders.
'He has people talking in one ear about supporting Israel and the other about staying clear of Middle East wars,' explains Warrick.
'Even if Washington and Tehran can hash out an arrangement, the risk of Israeli military action or sabotage would remain,' adds Brewer. 'The fact that this month's Israeli attack began while talks with the United States were ongoing underscores that risk.'
But the ball is in Trump's court.
'Trump may be the wildcard here depending on whether he wants to let the two sides 'fight it out,' or if he decides to press Israel to wind down its attacks and Iran to return to nuclear negotiations.,' concludes Atlantic Council analyst Alan Pino.
'Given that a nuclear deal in which Iran gives up enrichment is unlikely, even if a temporary halt to the fighting is achieved, Israel will keep Iran in its crosshairs and conflict between the two countries will dominate Trump's Middle East agenda for the foreseeable future.'