Has the deadlock become absolute? Iranian arrogance is accelerating the pace of a return to war. The United States is intensifying its transfers of military assets to the region, and pending the arrival of a third aircraft carrier, the number will rise to around 60,000. CENTCOM Commander Admiral Brad Cooper is presenting a comprehensive briefing on objectives and priorities in Washington, following military discussions with the Israeli army command. Today, Tuesday, November 3, coincides with the US midterm election day, meaning President Trump will have fulfilled his promise that there would be no military strike against Iran prior to the elections.
Iran has thwarted all mediation efforts, including Russian, Qatari, and Pakistani initiatives, and offered a flawed interpretation of the objectives behind the visit of the Makkah Joint Defense Agreement nations' delegation. While mediators focused on prioritizing the nuclear file and reopening the Strait of Hormuz without delay to pave the way for reciprocal steps, Washington took a significant step forward with a message from JD Vance to Mohsen Rezaei, a figure close to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei and part of the military decision-making apparatus.
The message was a serious attempt to test the possibility of a breakthrough through direct talks starting with the nuclear file, setting aside the incentives of the "Memorandum of Understanding and the seven conditions." However, Tehran was quick to reject discussing the nuclear file and refuse direct talks, through statements by Rezaei and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, dismissing the American attempt to find common ground for negotiations. Consequently, this positions Tehran to bear the responsibility for a return to war.
Vance’s message may be a final opportunity to avert war, mirroring an American approach utilized in major historical crises. Among these was the meeting between James Baker and Tariq Aziz on January 9, 1991, when Aziz refused to accept a letter from President George Bush to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein due to the conditions it contained. It was said at the time that the letter was written specifically to be rejected, and the war followed shortly after, breaking out just one week later.
Today's message culminates an American effort to avert war, anchored on preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Trump has repeatedly highlighted concerns that a nuclear Iran poses a threat to the region, international security, and the US itself. Consequently, the Iranian regime's possession of a nuclear weapon has become unacceptable, alongside the requirement to restrict the permissible range of its ballistic missiles. Furthermore, relinquishing its regional proxies is considered non-negotiable, as is ending piracy in the Straits of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb.
Alongside the message and the continuation of the tightened naval blockade, talks of war have moved forward. Washington wants to carry out intensive, destructive strikes that may not be limited to targeting nuclear and ballistic sites. Meanwhile, Tehran wants a prolonged, expanding conflict, with its theater spanning the reach of Iranian missiles.
Attention was drawn to Tehran's announcement that the "hidden" Supreme Leader met with senior military commanders to urge them to "confront any level of threats with an immediate, effective response and without geographical restrictions(!!)." This is a militia-style approach that antagonizes humanity, and its danger is doubled because the person who declared it is the number one man in the Iranian regime!
Iran’s alarming threat to transform the entire region into a theater of military operations is highly dangerous, fueled by the illusion that a costly war can save its political regime. This hazardous trajectory is further exacerbated by statements attributed to Supreme Leader Mojtaba, who reaffirmed that the "unity of the arenas is a decisive factor with a strategic impact on shaping a new political and security order in West Asia."
Yet West Asia is no jungle. It is a collection of Arab countries and peoples spanning the Eastern Mediterranean and the eastern Red Sea - nations that have rejected the Iranian model to build their own futures, and now stand on the verge of turning the page on the militias Tehran created to cement its control.
Ultimately, these propositions signal Iran's absolute inability to learn from the post-Sinwar disaster era. They ignore the strategic shift it brought about in Syria, the fracturing of Iranian proxies across Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen, and the total collapse of the era when Tehran could boast of ruling four Arab capitals.
The impending war poses major challenges for Lebanon, which has been broken by a horrific defeat caused by the Israeli-Iranian war on its soil. It would be highly dangerous to ignore the fact that Hezbollah, which is part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, will not hesitate to drag Lebanon into a new "support" war. Hezbollah was created for precisely such a moment, and it will give no heed to the people's pain, the catastrophe in the South, and the defeat of Lebanon.
Despite recognizing its own helplessness and knowing the outcome will only bring further death and occupation, the group will not hesitate to gamble with people's lives. This is driven on one hand by a desire to appease its handlers, and on the other by a bet that the war will secure a formula derived from the Iranian interpretation of the Memorandum of Understanding: the continuous coexistence of weapons and occupation, along with the subsequent strangling of any efforts to establish a capable state.
It is impossible to ignore the drawbacks of the authorities’ delay in executing their historic disarmament decisions, alongside their wait-and-see approach to translating the "Framework Agreement" into reality. This comes despite the absolute clarity of the core equation upon which the agreement was built: land in exchange for weapons.
A policy of postponement is a dangerous recipe; the state cannot escape executing its required mission to disarm and dismantle the illegal structures that have entrenched Iranian influence, a necessary step to mitigate the repercussions of the impending war. Initiating the dismantling of Hezbollah's pockets of influence within certain institutions, which have reportedly enabled it to transfer funds and partially rebuild some of its capabilities, is essential. Such steps are necessary to address judicial rulings regarding the group's explosives shipment, at the very least to disrupt aspects of its pattern of defiance and extortion.
