A Historic Opportunity in the Middle East

Today, we’re diving back into the Middle East situation, but I must emphasize that this article is tailored for those with strong critical thinking skills. For context, you might want to check out yesterday’s piece titled “Today, Israel Takes a Desperate Gamble.”

The reason is straightforward: Israel’s recent strike has unveiled a historic and monumental opportunity in the Middle East.

It’s far more complex than what we see in the news.

So, what do we see in the news?

Essentially, after Israel’s extensive airstrikes, Iran has retaliated with missile attacks, launching five waves today. Many of Israel’s military bases and hidden targets have been destroyed. The skies over Israel are now filled with a “meteor shower” of incoming Iranian missiles and Israeli interceptors. But as the saying goes, “Air defense is mostly empty effort,” and many of Iran’s missiles have evaded interception, causing explosions all over Israel.

There are numerous videos online depicting the dire situation in Israel. For instance, the U.S. ambassador to Israel appeared on TV, saying he had a tough night with multiple air raid sirens, forcing him to seek shelter five times. Another video features an Israeli female soldier, tearfully describing the trauma she experienced, saying no one should have to go through it. But here’s the kicker: If she shouldn’t have to go through it, why should the people of Gaza, Lebanon, or Yemen?

In fact, it’s quite ironic. The mayor of Rishon LeZion, south of Tel Aviv, stood in front of rubble and said he’d never seen such destruction—it felt like Gaza, not Israel. So, even Israel knows what Gaza looks like now.

But beyond these distressing videos, Israel has banned any further uploads of military base strikes to social media, labeling it a crime. Satellite images, however, suggest significant damage. For example, a military base in the southern desert shows several hangars destroyed, with planes now exposed to the elements. Even Israel’s national defense command center, previously claimed to be a civilian facility, has been hit. So has its nuclear research center.

In short, the current situation shows a prolonged period of tit-for-tat between Iran and Israel. Israel has announced that its airstrikes on Iran will last at least 14 days, while Iran has declared that the war with Israel has begun. It’s quite a spectacle, but as the saying goes, “Amateurs watch the excitement; experts look for the underlying reasons.”

So, what’s the underlying reason?

First, can Iran sustain its missile attacks on Israel? The answer is no. I’ve emphasized this many times: Conventional missiles are not nuclear weapons; their power is limited. Why? War, at its core, is an economic contest—using the least amount of money to achieve the greatest results. But relying solely on missile attacks is the opposite—it’s using the most money for the least results.

Iran is a “major power” in the Middle East, but years of sanctions have left its military far behind the U.S. and Israel. Its air defense system is particularly weak, with its most advanced Russian S-300 system dating back to 1978, making it a 40- to 50-year-old relic! Against Israel’s F-35s, Iran has little defense. Its air force is even worse, still using old F-14s and F-4s from before 1979—two generations behind the U.S. and Israel. It’s like fighting with spears against rifles!

Iran’s missiles are its only viable option for now, but it’s the least cost-effective strategy. I’ve mentioned before that while missiles look impressive on their launch pads, their actual destructive power is quite limited.

The damage they can inflict depends on the amount of explosives they can carry. Iran’s missiles typically carry at most a little over a ton, but the distance to Israel (at least 1,500 kilometers) often requires reducing the payload. So, instead of a full ton, they might carry only a few hundred kilograms, significantly reducing their impact.

In contrast, Israel’s air force uses the U.S.-made MK80 series of bombs on Gaza:

• MK81 weighs 250 pounds (about 114 kg) and is rarely used now.
• MK82 weighs 500 pounds (about 228 kg).
• MK83 weighs 1,000 pounds (about 454 kg).
• MK84 weighs 2,000 pounds (about 908 kg).

The damage caused by these bombs is far greater than that of Iran’s missiles. Iran’s missiles have a destructive power comparable to MK82 or MK83, at best MK84. But the cost difference is huge. An Iranian missile costs at least $1 to 2 million, while MK series bombs cost only $200,000 to $300,000. Israel’s airstrikes using these bombs are five to ten times cheaper than Iran’s missile retaliation.

So, while Iran’s missile attacks look impressive, they’re essentially using gold to achieve minor results. This is the price of being technologically behind.

The MK84 air bomb used by Israel may seem insignificant, but when dropped from an airplane, it causes more damage than most Iranian ballistic missiles!

If Iran had a powerful air force like Israel’s, even with a weak air defense, Israel wouldn’t dare attack.

Even if Iran used all its missiles, the damage would be limited. Compare this to Israel’s bombing of Gaza. By May of this year, Israel had dropped 108,000 tons of bombs on Gaza’s 300 square kilometers, destroying three-quarters of the area. That’s equivalent to Iran firing 200,000 missiles at Israel. But:

1. Iran doesn’t have that many missiles; the most generous estimate is a few thousand.
2. Iran’s missiles are less precise than Israel’s bombs.
3. Israel’s territory is over 70 times larger than Gaza.

Moreover, conventional missiles have almost no capability to penetrate underground facilities. So, despite the spectacle of Iran’s missile attacks, they don’t cause significant damage to Israel and are economically unsustainable. In fact, the more Iran retaliates with missiles, the happier Israel might be, as it weakens Iran’s economy. Iran’s economy has been struggling lately, and this could be a deliberate strategy to undermine it further.

This is the military perspective. But there are other angles, like the political one, which is even more critical.

As I’ve said before, during the Niger coup, I pointed out that in international struggles, even if you have a military advantage, if you lose politically, you’ll lose in the end. Let’s look at this from a political angle.

After Israel’s airstrike on Iran, Trump said in a CNN interview: “The Iranians we were negotiating with are mostly dead now.” He also complained that they were too tough. Why did he complain?

As I mentioned yesterday, the U.S. was set to resume negotiations with Iran in two days, but Israel’s sudden attack disrupted the talks and dragged the U.S. into the conflict. Trump surely saw through this trick. His words imply that if Iran had agreed to a deal earlier, this whole mess could have been avoided. But now, it’s too late for regrets.

Many experts, both domestic and international, say that Israel’s airstrike has achieved its goal: Iran will never negotiate with the U.S. again. The attack has also shattered the last hopes of the pro-Western faction in Iran. There’s a video online of young Iranian women, without headscarves, attending a national rally and openly stating that Iran can no longer compromise and must develop its own nuclear capability. Wearing no headscarf in public is a sign of the pro-American faction in Iran. These were the ones who strongly supported negotiations with the U.S.

How should we interpret this?

Before Soleimani’s assassination, there were pro-American factions in Iran. Afterward, they disappeared, leaving only the so-called “engagement faction,” those willing to negotiate with the West. But with Israel’s attack, even this faction is gone, leaving only the pro-nuclear faction.

Iran had been hesitant, but now, with the attack, all domestic pressure is gone. It’s highly likely that Iran will no longer waver and will seriously pursue nuclear capability, no matter the cost. This is another significant shift in the Middle East’s future.

Another major change in the Middle East is evident in how the U.S. controls Israel. Trump’s ability is far inferior to Biden’s. Think about it: Under Biden, even with Netanyahu’s defiance, Biden managed to force a ceasefire with Hamas on his last day in office. But Trump?

He knew about Israel’s plan in advance but couldn’t stop it. All he could do was post a cryptic tweet a few minutes before the airstrike, warning Iran. Then, when Iran declared an end to negotiations, Trump told Fox News that he still hoped to return to the negotiating table. But would Netanyahu let him? Definitely not.

In the coming period, Netanyahu will continue to attack Iran, further enraging it. Trump will be in an even more difficult position. Intervene? That would play right into Israel’s hands. Not intervene? Groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis will regain strength and become more active. In fact, Hamas has already increased its activities in Gaza, attacking an Israeli tank the day before yesterday and causing casualties yesterday.

What does this show?

Under Biden, Israel was somewhat controllable, but now Trump has no control and is being led by the nose.

To make matters worse, satellite images reveal that Israel’s damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities is not significant. Iran was already close to developing nuclear capability, and now, with the attack, the nation is furious. If Iran does develop nuclear weapons, what will the U.S. do?

Israel probably hopes to drag the U.S. into a ground war in Iran’s vast mountains. We’ve said before that the U.S. is on the brink of collapse, and getting involved in another war would be disastrous.

This highlights the differing interests: Trump doesn’t want more war in the Middle East because it would derail negotiations with Iran. Without negotiations, how can the U.S. disengage and focus on the Indo-Pacific? But Israel sees things differently. Netanyahu and Israel won’t rest until Hamas and Iran are neutralized.

For Iran, the situation is also tough. They’ve been pushed to the brink and must fight back to save face both domestically and internationally. But if they retaliate too strongly, such as developing nuclear weapons, they’ll be forced into a deadly conflict with the U.S. and Israel, resulting in mutual destruction. No one wants their homeland in ruins and bloodshed.

Now, let’s talk about the opportunities for us. With Israel’s actions, both the U.S. and Iran are in awkward positions. What opportunities arise?

The key term here is “united front value.” Many people think a country’s united front value depends on its strength or weakness. But that’s wrong. The real factors are its location and size, which are constant, unlike strength or weakness.

For example, during World War II, after the disastrous battles in China, Roosevelt saw no united front value in us and shifted focus to the Yalta Agreement with the Soviet Union. A few years later, the U.S. faced tough times in the Korean War.

More recently, Pakistan has been making headlines, but 20 years ago, it was a different story. Pakistan had almost no industry and was considered a close U.S. ally. Yet, we didn’t give up on it. We’ve invested consistently for decades, and now, the results are evident. Why?

Because united front value is also about timing and price. When “the Arc of Resistance” was strong, they had high demands. But now, after recent setbacks, their united front value has hit rock bottom. This is the perfect time to invest.

We must understand that Iran’s current struggles and wasteful missile attacks are temporary. What matters is Iran’s location and size, which give it a constant united front value. Iran is stronger than Pakistan was 20 years ago when it was a U.S. ally but couldn’t even make a motorcycle.

When the Arc of Resistance was at its peak, Iran acted tough and demanded a lot. Now, with Russia unable to help and forced to retaliate with costly missiles, Iran is desperate and demoralized. This is the best time to invest, when their demands are lowest.

In short, the U.S. can no longer control Israel, and the Middle East is heading for a major shift in power dynamics. We should seize this opportunity to invest. Otherwise, we don’t want the U.S. to shift its focus back to our region.

This is a historic opportunity we must not miss. Remember, your perspective determines your outcome, your attitude determines your altitude, and your mindset determines your path forward.