Uncertain future of Middle East under shadow of Israeli attack on Iran

In June 2025, the Middle East seems to have entered a new, more bloody and uncertain chapter of its prolonged instability. This largest and most comprehensive airstrike in recent memory, carried out by Israel, has not only pushed Iran’s military infrastructure to the brink of destruction, but has also brought about a deep ideological, diplomatic, and political crisis. The significance of this attack is not limited to the number of bombs and missiles—it is a well-planned, multilayered, and symbolic strike that has called into question the existence, identity, and regional leadership claim of Iran’s state system.

When more than 200 fighter jets penetrated Iranian airspace and launched attacks with unprecedented coordination and precision, it was not merely a military operation—it became a demonstration of strategic dominance. The targets were not just bases, radars, or missile centers; rather, Iran’s future potentials—nuclear laboratories, scientists, and high-level military intellectual infrastructure. The most terrifying aspect of this attack was its precision. Carried out with the help of modern cyber and intelligence data, this assault showed that war is no longer merely physical; it has now reached a new psychological and information-based dimension.

For Iran, this attack is a multi-dimensional blow. It not only exposed its defense weaknesses but also challenged the state’s confidence, unity among its people, and the moral authority of its rulers. Furthermore, the attack has taken the long-standing ideological conflict between Iran and Israel to a point where there is very little room left for diplomatic screens or regional understandings. It was a silent declaration—that Iran’s Tawhidi state model is no longer effective against the security concerns and pre-emptive policies of Israel, the United States, and their allies.

The impact of this attack is not limited to the battlefield; it has severely affected the geopolitical balance and future alliance structure of the entire Middle East. Iran today is isolated, attacked, and under question—and the answer to that question must be sought not just from a military perspective, but from ideological and strategic viewpoints as well.

At the root of this conflict is not just geopolitical dominance, but a deep struggle of history, ideology, religion, and national identity. Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran has envisioned itself as the Tawhidi state of the Muslim world, whose goal is to build resistance against Western occupation. In contrast, Israel has, since its birth, linked its existence to religious identity—a Jewish state, suffering from perpetual insecurity. As a result, the ongoing conflict between these two states is not over a specific boundary or resource—it is essentially a war of ideology and existence.

The Palestine issue has inevitably become entangled in this conflict. Iran’s support of groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah is seen as a direct threat by Israel. On the other hand, Iran views the blockade, settlement, and oppression of Palestinians as a form of religious war against the Muslim masses. On one side, religious morality; on the other, the imperative of national security—this bipolar conflict has never embraced a middle path of compromise.

This conflict is not limited to a dispute between Iran and Israel; it is a brutal revelation of the complex geopolitical reality of the Middle East, the shadow war of global powers, and the strategy of dominance. The scale and targeted selection of Israel’s recent operation clearly show that—it was not merely the capability of a single state; rather, it was the outcome of a well-planned, multi-national support. Such a complex and technology-dependent attack would not have been possible without the tacit consent, technological assistance, or direct intelligence cooperation of Western powers.

Especially the United States, Britain, and their allied states’ long-term military presence and oil-based economic relations in the Middle East have created a kind of encirclement strategy—which has strategically pressed Iran from all directions, while giving Israel unrestricted operational advantages. The U.S. bases located in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and even Afghanistan have played an important role in implementing this strategic position. As a result, Iran today is not only regionally but strategically a deeply encircled state—whose response or defensive capability is increasingly being questioned.

But for Iran, the most worrying aspect recently has been the role—or more precisely, the absence—of its historical allies. The states that once saw their own share in the ideological inspiration of Iran’s Islamic Revolution are now silent or opportunistic. Russia is internally pressured due to the Ukraine war and is not as active on Middle Eastern matters as before. China has so far shown interest only in expanding its dominance through economic strategy; it has not deviated from its long-standing policy of not engaging in direct military conflict. And Pakistan—which once claimed 'brotherhood' with Iran—today has adopted a kind of strategic neutrality due to U.S. military bases and economic favor. As a result, Iran has fallen into a kind of diplomatic isolation—which signals a tragic fall for a once regionally influential state.

More important than this isolation and military blow is the question raised about Iran’s ideological structure. When a state holds religious interpretation and ideology as the main driving force of its governance, it affects not only political decisions—but also the state's strategy, economy, education, and foreign relations deeply. The question is, is such a religion-based decision-making framework realistically effective in today’s multidimensional, scientific, and technology-dependent world?

Iran’s history deepens this question further. Once this land was the center of intellectuals like Al-Biruni, Ibn Sina, and Ferdowsi—from where medical science, mathematics, philosophy, and literature enlightened the world. Yet today, the same country has deviated from its historical identity under religious rigidity, restricted information, and the obsession with military retaliation. As a result, the state’s self-identity has been questioned—where failing to keep pace with modernity has repeatedly caused technological lag. In this reality, even the possibility of nuclear weapons cannot provide a sustainable security structure.

When a state formulates even its future plans and defense strategies based on ideological emotion, it harms itself more than its enemy. In the modern world, a state’s power is determined by its knowledge-based economy, technology-dependent military capacity, strategic alliances, and diplomatic flexibility—not just by religious fervor. This disconnection from knowledge and technology has not only isolated Iran but turned it into a frustrated, reactionary state—where every step now is not about defense, but a struggle for survival.

The only way to emerge from this situation is—Iran must deeply and self-critically reflect on its ideological framework. The identity of a state becomes sustainable only when it aligns with human welfare, scientific progress, and global humanity. Otherwise, no matter how much religious fundamentalism invokes ancient glory, it is not suitable for facing the real crises of the future.

It would be a mistake to view Israel’s recent operation as merely a war. It is a profound signal for Iran and a call for ultimate self-assessment. At this moment, Iran needs not war, but to reassess the ideological foundations of its state and find a path of effective, modern, and humane dialogue with the global order.

Today’s humanity expects more civil, democratic, and science-based leadership. Therefore, if Tawhidi consciousness (monotheistic ideology) conflicts with modernity, liberalism, human rights, and scientific thinking, then it is not just self-deception—it may also become a path to self-destruction.

If Iran looks back at its enlightened past—where it was the bearer of knowledge, civilization, and thought—then this dark chapter can be transformed into a path of light. Let Iran once again come to global leadership through knowledge and humanity, not through war and conflict—let that be our universal hope and expectation in the face of the current crisis.

Chiraranjan Sarkar: Columnist