A month after ceasefire with Israel, Iranians fear another war
"I don't think this ceasefire will last," said Peyman, a 57-year-old resident of Shiraz in Iran's south, one of numerous cities hit last month as Israel unleashed an unprecedented bombing campaign against its staunch rival.
The Israeli offensive targeted key nuclear facilities and military sites, killing top commanders and nuclear scientists and hundreds of other people, while also wreaking havoc in some residential areas.
The attacks triggered the fiercest fighting in history between the longtime foes, ending with a ceasefire announced on June 24.
But Israel has signalled it could return to fighting if Iran attempts to rebuild nuclear facilities or carry out any actions deemed a threat, such as moving to develop an atomic bomb – an ambition Tehran has consistently denied it was pursuing.
Iran, in turn, has vowed to deliver a harsh response if attacked again.
Nuclear diplomacy with the United States – which briefly joined the war with strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites – has stalled, deepening a sense of uncertainty about what lies ahead.
"I am scared the war would start again," said Hamid, a 54-year-old government employee who gave only his first name.
"It will lead to the death of more innocent people and the destruction of the country's infrastructure."
During the war, Israel struck major Iranian cities including the capital Tehran, hitting military sites, government buildings and the state television headquarters.
More than 1,000 people were killed in Iran, according to authorities. Retaliatory missile and drone attacks killed 29 people in Israel.
Many residents fled Teheran, seeking refuge in other parts of the country, even though few regions were untouched by the blasts and smoke-covered skies.
Nearly a month later, a series of fires that broke out across Iran in recent days – including one at a major oil facility – have triggered speculations which officials were quick to dismiss, denying any acts of sabotage.
"This war really frightened me," said 78-year-old housewife Golandam Babaei, from the western Kermanshah province.
She lived through the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, a painful memory for many of her generation.
"I kept telling myself, please God, do not let the past repeat itself," Babaei told AFP.
The war with Israel, although much shorter and fought mostly with air strikes and missiles rather than by ground forces, revived grim memories of the conflict with Iraq.
That war, triggered by an Iraqi invasion in 1980, killed an estimated 500,000 people on both sides.
It featured chemical warfare and prolonged front-line bombardments, scarring Iranians in the then-nascent Islamic republic born out of the 1979 revolution.
Since then, for decades, Iran had managed to keep conflicts away from its territory. But now after the 12-day war with Israel, some Iranians feel a profound sense of vulnerability.
"I kept thinking I don't want to flee again, we have nowhere to go. I cannot run to the mountains like the past," said Babaei.
For Ali Khanzadi, a 62-year-old war veteran, the conflict with Israel highlighted a change compared to the 1980s when "we didn't have any advanced military equipment" to fight the Iraqis.
Khanzadi, who was wounded in battle in 1983, said that the war with Israel, while much shorter, had a more sinister dimension.
Unlike in the past, modern military technology means "they can kill a child in his sleep remotely using a drone," he said.
In the face of the Israeli threats and attacks, Iranian authorities have repeatedly invoked national unity.
Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said the offensive was aimed at toppling the Islamic republic's clerical system, and urged Iranian diplomats and military officials to proceed with "care and precision" as the country cautiously moves on.
Teheran has said it remained open to nuclear diplomacy with the United States which the war had derailed, but officials have expressed concerns over renewed attacks and demanded unspecified US guarantees to resume negotiations.
Ordinary Iranians appear to share fears that the conflict could erupt again.
"I hope that this will not happen," said Hamid. Babaei said she was praying "for peace, for us to remain safe in our homes."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
22 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
Mideast studies in US in crossfire of Trump-Harvard fight
THE issue of academic research on the Middle East has become a political flashpoint in the United States, where critics of Israel allege a "Palestine exception" exists when it comes to free speech rights. Case in point, recently a special edition of the prestigious Harvard Educational Review (HER) was in the works, entirely dedicated to the hot-button issue of the Palestinians – the articles had been painstakingly written, edited and approved. But authors said they received an unusual demand for a final readout by lawyers, which soon derailed their efforts. The publisher's stunning late-stage decision to scrap the entire edition reflects the overheated political climate in the US where academic research on the Middle East has attracted accusations of so-called "wokeism" and "anti-Semitism" from President Donald Trump, as conflict rages in the region. The edition began taking shape when, in March 2024 – six months after the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israel and the Israeli reprisals in the Gaza Strip – the renowned Harvard publication called for papers for a special issue on "Education and Palestine." Anthropologist Thea Abu El-Haj and her colleagues submitted a paper on "scholasticide," a term describing the destruction of an education system, like in Gaza, with reference to the experience of Palestinian teachers during the Lebanese Civil War between 1975 and 1990. But then the authors received phone calls informing them that the text would have to be submitted to Harvard's Office of the General Counsel for a "risk assessment." "I have been publishing for decades in academic journals – including HER twice –and I have never been asked for this kind of review," said El-Haj, a professor at Columbia University's Barnard College. After the authors objected to "censorship," the director of Harvard Education Press Jessica Fiorillo, told the authors the special issue had been cancelled in its entirety. Fiorillo denied "censorship" in a memo to the authors, seen by AFP, blaming inadequate review because the editors insisted on limiting the publisher's involvement to copyediting – without touching the "politically charged content." "The only explanation that makes sense to me is that this is another instance of what has been called the 'Palestine exception' to free speech," said El-Haj, accusing Harvard of not upholding free speech while proclaiming to champion it amid its fight with Trump. Since returning to power, Trump has accused prestigious US universities of anti-Semitism for failing to protect Jewish students during protests against Israel's war in Gaza. In an escalating war of attrition against Harvard, Trump sought to cut more than US$2.6 billion of funding to the Ivy League university, while seeking to block entry of international students – a quarter of its enrolment. Harvard said it had strengthened measures to protect Jewish and Israeli students while fighting the government's measures in court. "The chilling climate for scholarly inquiry about Palestine at Harvard (and beyond) has been difficult for some time. Faculty, staff, and students have understandably felt a generalised cloud of fear and anxiety," Margaret Litvin, an Arabic literature professor at Boston University, told AFP. At the start of the year, Harvard also adopted a definition of anti-Semitism used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). That definition is contested, however, as critics argue it may prevent criticism of Israel. That distinction appears to be at the heart of the furor over the "education and Palestine" edition of the HER, said Chandni Desai, a University of Toronto professor, who was supposed to pen an article for the journal. Harvard University did not comment. The submitted articles would "likely fail" to have passed the IHRA definition test because "all the pieces are critical of Israel," Desai said. "We've never seen an entire special issue collection being cancelled – especially after... contracts have been signed and reviews and revisions done."
The Sun
22 minutes ago
- The Sun
Finland marks 50 years of Helsinki Accords amid Ukraine war tensions
HELSINKI: Finland on Thursday hosts a conference marking 50 years since the signing of the Helsinki Final Act, a landmark agreement on respecting borders and territorial integrity. The event takes place amid heightened tensions following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has severely tested the principles enshrined in the 1975 accord. Keynote speakers include Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, though both will deliver their remarks remotely. Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen, the current OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, will open the conference. Russia confirmed its participation but will not send high-level representatives. Foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stated, 'Russia does not see the expediency of participating at a high political level,' though representatives will still engage in discussions. The Helsinki Final Act, signed by 35 nations including the US and Soviet Union, established the OSCE and enshrined principles such as sovereignty, non-use of force, and inviolability of borders. These commitments have been undermined by Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, triggering the worst crisis in OSCE history. Ukraine has repeatedly called for Russia's expulsion from the OSCE, though Moscow remains a member. In 2024, Russian lawmakers voted to suspend participation in the OSCE parliamentary assembly, calling it discriminatory. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga, attending the conference, will hold talks with Finnish President Alexander Stubb and other officials. Discussions will focus on 'synchronising allied pressure on Moscow,' according to Ukraine's foreign ministry. Finland, which closed its 1,340-kilometre border with Russia in late 2023 over alleged migrant orchestration by Moscow, remains a key player in regional security discussions. – AFP
New Straits Times
an hour ago
- New Straits Times
Trump gets his way on tariffs, but global trade system intact for now
PARIS: President Donald Trump has succeeded in strong-arming nations to accept higher tariffs on US exports, yet for now experts see little threat to the postwar trend of lower duties in the pursuit of greater wealth all around. Since World War II, most politicians and economists view free trade as a pillar of globalisation, enshrined in the 1947 signing of the GATT accord. It was the precursor to the World Trade Organisation, which now has 166 members and covers 98 percent of global commerce. "What we've learned in the postwar is that lower tariffs are better for prosperity of your own country," said Richard Baldwin, a professor at the IMD Business School in Switzerland. "And it's also good if other countries lower their tariffs, so we have a vibrant international economy," Baldwin, who was a member of US president George Bush's Council of Economic Advisors, told AFP. Trump however has embarked on a punishing trade war, claiming that deficits with other nations show they are "ripping off" the United States. He has recently landed accords with Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia and, most importantly, the European Union. For dozens of other nations, US "reciprocal" tariffs are to jump from 10 percent to various steeper levels come August 1, including powerhouse economies such as South Korea, India and Taiwan. "To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is 'tariff'," Trump repeatedly said during the 2024 election campaign that returned him to office. Despite the headline figures, many economists expect the fallout for the global trade system overall to be limited. US importers may well decide to procure more from American producers as the tariffs are applied, or pass along the higher costs to consumers. "That won't have a systemic impact" outside the United States, Pascal Lamy, a former WTO chief, told AFP, calling the tariffs a "Pyrrhic victory" for Trump. He noted that Trump is targeting only the US deficits for goods and not services, "the part of global trade that is increasing the fastest." "You need to change your outlook when it comes to international trade," Lamy said, adding that "Donald Trump has a medieval view" of the issue. And instead of making a country more prosperous, the accepted economic wisdom is that by making goods more expensive, tariffs weigh on economic growth for everyone involved. "Putting up your own tariffs is not a way to make yourself richer – that's something that people have given up on many years ago," Baldwin said. "Trump has not screwed up the entire world trading system yet because the rest of the world hasn't changed their opinion as to whether trade is good or bad," he said. "And generally speaking, it's good." Global trade has risen sharply in recent decades, totalling nearly US$24 trillion in 2023, according to WTO figures. US imports represent just 13 per cent of overall imports – meaning the vast majority of international commerce will not be directly affected by Trump's levies. "It's significant, but it's only a small part of imports worldwide, and the rest of the world still wants the system of engagement and interdependence to work," said Elvire Fabry, a specialist in geopolitical economics at the Jacques Delors Institute. Several countries have moved in recent years to forge new trade deals, a trend Trump's tariffs blitz could accelerate. In March, Japan, South Korea and China pledged to speed up negotiations on an accord, while Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has called for a deal between the Mercosur Latin America bloc and Japan. The European Union has also signed a free-trade deal with Mercosur, though its ratification has been held up, in particular by France over concerns about unfair agriculture competition. The EU has also relaunched efforts to secure a deal with Malaysia and countries in Central Asia. In April, the WTO said world merchandise trade would fall 0.2 per cent this year before a "modest" recovery to growth of 2.5 per cent in 2026. But those forecasts took into account only the tariffs Trump had announced up to then – not the more severe levels he has threatened to put in place starting August 1 for countries that have not signed deals with Washington.
