A Controllable Conflict with No Winners

From June 13 to 24, an unprecedented large-scale offensive confrontation took place between Israel and Iran. During this period, the United States directly joined the conflict in support of Israel, launching long-range bombings on three major Iranian nuclear facilities, prompting a symbolic retaliatory response from Iran. Ultimately, under direct U.S. mediation, the conflict transitioned into a ceasefire, with all three parties claiming “victory.” From a joint U.S.-Israeli assault on Iran to a rapid ceasefire just 12 days later, this was a conflict with no winners—a calculated, limited clash filled with theatrical displays that failed to address the fundamental contradictions, and thus risks reigniting at any moment.

There were no winners in this conflict. Israel, Iran, and the United States all paid varying costs at different levels, with far-reaching consequences. Of course, there were clear losers—the people of Israel and Iran caught in the fire, the ever-scarce willingness for reconciliation and strategic mutual trust between Iran, Israel, and the United States, and the reputation of the U.S., which again played both referee and player.

Israel, leveraging its powerful long-range strike capabilities and intelligence networks, adhered to its military tradition of “preemptive strikes” and repelling threats beyond its borders. Under the codename “Lion’s Rise,” it conducted targeted bombings on select Iranian nuclear facilities, government institutions, missile and air force bases. With the help of undercover agents, over 20 senior Iranian military officers and more than 10 nuclear scientists were physically eliminated.

As a “micro-state” in terms of population, land, and resources, Israel dared to proactively challenge Iran—a Middle Eastern power ten times its size in all three aspects. This showcased Israel’s strong national will, sophisticated military strategy, and supreme air dominance. Notably, Israeli air forces operated flamboyantly over Tehran for two hours, even performing aerial refueling. Israeli intelligence’s deep infiltration, information acquisition, local recruitment, and surprise attacks on Iranian soil created a modern myth of both overt and covert warfare.

However, Israel still emerged a loser. In terms of morality and international opinion, Israel once again blatantly trampled on the UN Charter and international law, violating Iran’s sovereignty, airspace, and territorial integrity under the pretext of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Moreover, Israel used the airspace of Arab countries between it and Iran as if it were its own, turning them into war corridors and violating the sovereignty, airspace, and dignity of these innocent neighbors.

Israel’s undeclared war and surprise attack on Iran—including direct “decapitation” of military leaders and continued assassinations of nuclear scientists—constitute typical acts of state terrorism. Ending the lives of foreign military personnel and civilians without formal charges, defense, or verdicts gravely undermines modern civilization, the rule of law, and humanitarian values, further damaging Israel’s already distorted and negative international image—perhaps even to the point of disgust.

Israel’s blitz on Iran triggered a fierce counterstrike dubbed “Sincere Promise-3.” In just 12 days, Iran launched 22 rounds of long-range airstrikes against Israeli territory, firing at least 534 medium-range missiles and deploying waves of drones. It also achieved a breakthrough in controlling Israeli airspace via missile attacks.

Despite U.S. assistance in joint defense, Israel’s so-called ironclad multilayered long-range interception system was heavily breached. Major cities like Tel Aviv, Haifa, Beersheba, and Eilat endured war-grade bombings for the first time. Key departments, energy facilities, and economic hubs were either destroyed or seriously damaged. For the first time in over half a century, Israeli citizens experienced the horror of “hellfire” raining from the skies, plunging the nation into unprecedented panic.

Israel’s strong offense and weak defense created an imbalance that was not just tactical but a strategic and psychological defeat. This marked the second time in two years that the myth of Israel’s military invincibility was shattered. On October 7, 2023, Israel’s security defenses were unexpectedly breached by Hamas, catching its military off guard and causing heavy civilian casualties. This time, despite meticulous planning and preemptive strikes, its narrow airspace—though protected by the world’s most advanced defense systems—was still riddled by Iran’s far stronger retaliatory “rain of missiles.” The lasting political, social, and psychological trauma of this 12-day conflict on Israel and its people remains to be seen.

Iran was not a winner either. Although Iran was the victim of aggression and earned some international sympathy, and even fought Israel to a military stalemate while achieving a historic breakthrough in striking deep into Israeli territory—something Arab countries had failed to do for half a century—it still fell short in other areas. As a regional power long seeking superpower status, the undisputed leader of the “Shia Crescent” in the Middle East, the cornerstone of the “Axis of Resistance,” and a stronghold against U.S. and Israeli dominance, Iran suffered a disastrous and humiliating initial phase of the war. Despite effectively retaliating against Israeli core cities from afar, it failed to defend its own airspace, critical facilities, military leadership, and nuclear scientists at close range. Authorities fixated on inspecting women’s clothing for compliance while neglecting the detection of thousands of embedded Israeli spies and agents.

From a long-term shadow war and espionage campaign with almost no victories, to the mysterious crash of President Raisi’s plane in 2024, and now to a defenseless state with unprotected security—enemy aircraft roam unimpeded, spies and traitors emerge endlessly and act at will—Iran resembles the Philistine giant Goliath from legend, ambushed and beheaded by a heroic Jewish king: large but hollow, big but not strong.

Faced with Israel’s blitz, Iran’s key figures are unable to protect their lives, critical facilities are left exposed to bombing, Tehran becomes a ghost town, and national defense reveals gaping holes. Especially astonishing are the weakness of Iran’s air defense and its security systems.

This is the first time in 37 years since the end of the Iran–Iraq War in 1988 that Iran has suffered large-scale, sustained airstrikes by a foreign adversary. The memory of two generations of peace and security has thus ended, and the country now faces the risk of nuclear leakage and contamination.

During the Iran–Iraq War, Iran was nearly isolated and unsupported. Yet now, under a combined Israeli-American assault, Iran is still left in “glorious solitude.” Surrounding Arab and Islamic countries merely watch from the sidelines. The so-called “Axis of Resistance” offers only verbal support via Yemen’s Houthi forces. Western governments neither imposed embargoes on Israel nor suspended supplies. German Chancellor Merz even publicly praised and thanked Israel for “doing the dirty work for everyone.” The NATO summit didn’t mention the Israeli-American attack on Iran at all. Instead, it accused Iran of supplying military equipment to Russia…

Iran suffered unprecedented airstrikes and bombings: more than 600 dead, nearly 5,000 injured, and painstakingly developed nuclear facilities widely damaged.

However, the repeated humiliation of Iran’s national and ethnic dignity doesn’t stem entirely from Israel’s or America’s overwhelming military or technological advantage. Rather, it’s due to Iran’s own government’s game-like, performative, even transactional military responses and diplomatic bargaining.

This kind of interaction model has created a new framework of mutual damage control between warring states—but it also renders the sacrifices made by the Iranian people over the past 40 years for the regime utterly meaningless.

The U.S. deployed strategic bombers in the “Midnight Hammer” operation to clean up the aftermath of Israel’s attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. But it first notified the Iranian government, allowing them to take emergency measures to avoid or minimize losses.

When Iran struck back by attacking a U.S. military base in Qatar, it likewise informed the U.S. beforehand, turning what could have been a legitimate act of revenge into a staged military-diplomatic performance—and earning public thanks from President Trump.

Of course, turning geopolitics into a damage-control game didn’t begin now. It started in 2021 with the U.S. assassination of Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani in Iraq, followed by Iran’s symbolic retaliation. It continued with the two symbolic tit-for-tat strikes between Iran and Israel in April and October 2024—especially with Iran’s habit of pre-informing adversaries, delaying attack times, and trying to avoid provoking further escalation.

Matters of national sovereignty, questions of war and peace, enmity and alliance—these are solemn and serious issues, closely tied to the people’s safety and emotions.

Iran’s long-standing love-hate flirtation with the “Great and Little Satans” it curses so often, and its behind-the-scenes coordination, makes the outside world feel that the happiness of several generations of Iranians sacrificed for exporting the Islamic Revolution is utterly worthless.

The fact that Iran was able to uncover so many Israeli spies perhaps also indirectly proves that the regime, the system, and the chosen path of the country are increasingly losing their centripetal force and cohesion—or in other words, the state and the regime are beginning to split.

The United States didn’t win either. Trump boasted about his “timely intervention” and claimed victory through the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities. Some U.S. lawmakers even sycophantically nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize. But America gained little and lost much.

As a superpower, the U.S. used five rounds of nuclear negotiations as a cover, employed strategic deception to support Israel’s surprise attack, and claimed it would decide on military action within two weeks—only to seize the opportunity and strike Iran while it was vulnerable, using surgical strikes.

Its political integrity, national ethics, and international credibility have all collapsed.

As the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons in combat—causing hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths—and as a founding member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the U.S., by bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities, has now led the way in undermining that very treaty.

President Trump, who claims to hate war, bombed Syrian government targets early in his first term and provoked armed clashes with Iran in the Persian Gulf before leaving office. Not even halfway through his second term, he has already deployed strategic bombers and bunker busters against Iranian nuclear sites…

With such an unreliable president in charge, what “virtue” or “credibility” does America even have left?

The United States claimed to have destroyed Iran’s three major nuclear facilities. However, intelligence agencies from both the U.S. and Israel denied this, judging that it only delayed Iran’s restoration of nuclear capabilities by several months or years.

By conspiring with Israel and jointly attacking Iran, the U.S. broke its promises, intensified Iran’s strategic doubts and anxieties, and may have inadvertently pushed Iran to abandon its strategic hesitation and truly embark on the path of nuclear armament for self-preservation.

This conflict is a phase of the “Sixth Middle East War” that began on October 7, 2023, and is also a contest between state actors with the highest levels of equipment and tactics.

Since Islamists, Iran, and the U.S. all did not want the conflict to escalate into a fully uncontrollable situation, and had all preset boundaries and objectives, the conflict showed high intensity but remained controllable.

Of course, the ceasefire does not mean the war has completely ended, because none of the three parties fully achieved their goals.

Israel seeks to completely destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities and long-range missile systems, and preferably trigger domestic chaos or even regime change in Iran, thereby fundamentally ending Iran’s hostile policies.

Therefore, it focused on striking and eliminating Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, strategic weapons, military leaders, and scientific research personnel, while also trying to create panic to stir up public discontent and provoke a color revolution. But these goals were only partially achieved.

The United States hoped to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program through cooperation with Israel, and force Iran to sign a new agreement renouncing its regional expansion policy. However, it also feared being drawn into another quagmire of war.

Thus, it initially played the role of support aircraft and logistics provider for Israel’s war machine, and once Israel had secured control of Iranian airspace, the U.S. joined in personally to carry out deeper strikes and targeted removals of nuclear facilities—while also informing Iran in advance to prevent misjudgment.

Iran tried to pursue equal nuclear rights, assert its status as a major regional power, and raise the banner of the “Axis of Resistance.”

At the same time, it sought to avoid excessive bloodshed and especially avoid direct war with the U.S.

Therefore, after responding proportionally to Israel and symbolically retaliating against the U.S., Iran actively sought and accepted a ceasefire to prevent escalation of war that could eventually affect domestic stability and regime legitimacy.

At present, Israel has doubled its military operational range, expanding from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Iranian plateau.

However, due to its small population, narrow territory, and scarce resources, it is not well suited for a prolonged war of attrition, and must coordinate with the U.S.—which presents its own strategic limitations.

The United States, strategically reducing its footprint in the Middle East, aims to maintain regional control at minimal cost.

Thus, it must rely on its staunch ally Israel, yet also wishes to preserve the overall balance of power among major regional ethnic groups. For that reason, it seeks a compromise with Iran that serves U.S. interests.

After the overextension following the Arab Spring and facing severe U.S. sanctions, Iran’s government and people have struggled to endure.

This joint attack by Israel and the U.S. inflicted heavy military losses and deepened Iran’s diplomatic isolation and passivity.

Thus, Iran has neither the will nor the capacity for prolonged external entanglement, and instead hopes to return to peace as soon as possible and begin a reconstruction process—including restoring military, political, and diplomatic credibility, rebuilding morale among troops and civilians, and avoiding becoming a second Libya or Iraq.

The truce is merely one episode in the long history of hostility and realpolitik between Iran and Israel.

Since the root and structural contradictions remain unresolved, the confrontation and conflict between Iran and the other two sides may “relapse” at any time.

Prof. Ma is the Dean of the Institute of Mediterranean Studies (ISMR) at Zhejiang International Studies University in Hangzhou. He specializes in international politics, particularly Islam and Middle Eastern affairs. He previously worked as a senior Xinhua correspondent in Kuwait, Palestine, and Iraq.