Are Iran and Israel already getting started on the next phase of their conflict?

The National

17 hours ago

US President Donald Trump has only himself to blame for the consequences of his rush to declare military victory over Iran, and his hasty announcement of a ceasefire between Iran and Israel before verifying and conclusively assessing the results of Washington's military operations against Tehran's nuclear programme.
It appears that Mr Trump has backed himself into a corner and took on the burden of proof, whereas that burden should have remained on Iran to demonstrate the fate of its nuclear programme.
The Islamic Republic has moved to suspend co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the only body capable of assessing the extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities, the state of its centrifuges, and the possible location of its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
In this way, Tehran has turned the tables, and Mr Trump has found himself caught in a spiral of justification, battling the media and the Democrats, while supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei re-emerged to deliver a triumphant speech, exuding defiance and confidence, and dismissing the US President's actions as a failure.
Part of the problem for Mr Trump is that he personalises politics and reduces strategic issues to political tactics. He refuses to concede his mistakes and instead elevates himself above acknowledging them, even when they come at a high cost.
Some might say Mr Trump did well to declare a ceasefire after damaging Iran's nuclear facilities. Others could argue that he spared the region a prolonged and potentially escalating war.
All this could be true if both sides, Iranian and Israeli, had signed a formal truce and a roadmap to end the conflict, not just a temporary de-escalation. But there is an inherent flaw in the Trump administration's approach of patchwork fixes and interim arrangements across a number of files. There is a tendency to claim achievements before they are actually secured.
The US President's envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, appears to be a sharp and adept dealmaker, and perhaps genuinely averse to war. But he doesn't appear to understand the history of the conflicts he is trying to end, nor does he have the heft that his negotiating counterparts possess. With regard to Iran, he seemingly hasn't grasped the extent to which its rulers are entrenched in their nuclear, ballistic and expansionist doctrines – or, for that matter, their patience and their ability to prevaricate.
To be clear, this isn't just about the war but also about the US-Iran talks that preceded Israel's strikes. This also reveals the extent to which Mr Witkoff has misjudged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ruthless political tactics.
Behind closed doors and in public, Tehran's rulers are adamant that they will not abandon the nuclear programme, no matter the incentives Mr Witkoff offers, whether it is sanctions relief or the offer to join an international nuclear consortium. Nonetheless, the Trump administration continues to talk up a grand bargain with it.
Meanwhile, Tehran insists on excluding from negotiations the issues of Iran's ballistic missiles programme and its use of armed proxies across the region. The Trump team, therefore, risks falling into the same trap that was laid for the administration of former US president Barack Obama in the run-up to the 2015 nuclear deal.
The Trump-Witkoff duo speaks of returning to negotiations with the Islamic Republic, while Mr Khamenei has made it clear that the US President must first express regret for having used the demeaning term 'surrender' in reference to the Iranian state. He also warned Mr Trump against contemplating another military adventure.
Indeed, Iran's supreme leader has scored a major win by securing American guarantees that his establishment wouldn't be touched. This was embedded in Iran's carefully staged retaliatory strikes on a US base in Qatar in a way that ensured no American personnel was harmed.
Arguably, Iran could be in a better negotiating position than before, despite the considerable damage to its nuclear facilities.
It seems to have smuggled out highly enriched uranium to unknown locations within the country, and moved to suspend co-operation with the IAEA, freeing itself from external oversight. IAEA director general Rafael Grossi, meanwhile, has said Tehran is just months away from nuclear enrichment necessary for a bomb.
Moreover, it's worth asking whether Mr Trump would venture to strike Iran again in the future. First, this would amount to an admission on Mr Trump's part that his strikes this month failed to achieve their objective. Second, the US President might well worry about a domestic political backlash.
With that being said, a resumption of the Israeli-Iranian military confrontation is on the cards once Mr Trump calms down. Indeed, Mr Netanyahu now finds himself at the mercy of the US President's wrath and is likely to calculate each move with great caution. However, neither Israel nor Iran is likely to back down from their respective objectives.
Thus, the ceasefire is fragile, and with the outcome of the US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities still contested, a renewed confrontation is likely. After all. a clash suits the ruling class in both Israel and Iran.
Mr Trump now faces a deeper problem. Both Iran and Israel feel the US President has betrayed them. Israel in particular is under pressure from Mr Trump, yet it will feel the need to take additional steps regarding Iran's nuclear programme, missiles and regional proxies.
All this means Mr Witkoff's talk of a 'comprehensive' agreement with Iran belongs to the realm of wishful thinking, and contradicts the mood music coming out of Tehran. Iran is willing to talk in order to stall, not to make concessions for the sake of a grand bargain.
A close reading of Iran's statements, including those from Mr Khamenei, reveals that its overriding priority remains the preservation of its rule, anchored in its nuclear, ballistic and expansionist doctrines. Everything else is just rhetoric.