How 14 Bombs May Change the Middle East

The Economist: “Three questions now hang over the region: can the ceasefire hold; will there be a follow-on diplomatic deal to restrict Iran’s nuclear programme and will the Middle East become more stable after the war?”

“Begin with the ceasefire. Neither Israel nor Iran have formally confirmed the cessation of hostilities, but both have good reason to stop fighting. The theocratic Iranian regime has long chanted ‘Death to America’, but has for decades sought to avoid a direct confrontation with the superpower, preferring instead to rely on proxy militias and occasional diplomacy. It is unpopular at home, its armed forces seem powerless against Israel, and its allies across the region have been weakened. With America’s entry into the war, Iran may now prefer to lick its wounds.”

“As for Israel, it is unlikely Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, will defy Mr Trump after hailing his historic military intervention. Moreover, Israeli military sources reckon they have destroyed nearly all of the targets on their list. Indeed, some suggested Israel might declare victory and stop attacking Iran, even without a formal ceasefire. Mr Netanyahu may now feel he has achieved a legacy-defining victory against Israel’s arch-enemy. Mr Trump, for his part, will not want the war to drag on, having reassured Americans that he was not getting them into another ‘forever war’ after those in Iraq and Afghanistan, which he has long denounced.”

“As for the nuclear program, Iran will not unlearn the technology it has mastered. Humiliated and resentful, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, could yet decide that his regime needs nuclear weapons for survival. Even if most of its facilities have been destroyed, the program might resume in secret.“