Globalinfo.az conducted an interview on the topic of the Iran-Israel war with Pakistani geopolitical analyst Dr. Shazia Anwar Cheema, who holds a PhD and works at the Department of Semiotics and Philosophy of Communication at Charles University in Prague.
– Ms. Shazia, even though the Iran-Israel war is over, it cannot be said that the conflict is completely resolved. The fact that Iran has not fully opened its airspace gives reason to say that Israel may attack again. It explains the attack by saying that Iran poses a threat to its security. Iran denies this. Will Iran continue its nuclear enrichment program? In general, what did Israel, the US, and Iran gain and lose in the 12-day war?
-As far as winning and losing is concerned, Israel turns out to be the loser in this twelve-day war. The façade Israel created about its invincibility and impunity has been shattered. However, in my opinion, Iran too has suffered a severe blow due to its strategic ambiguity while navigating between the Global South and the Global North.
Iran’s reluctance to include a security umbrella while signing the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Russia has caused serious damage. The decision not to purchase the S-400 system from Russia also proved to be a major strategic misstep.
The level of infiltration within Iranian intelligence should have been rectified at least after the security lapses related to the assassination attempts on Ismail Haniyeh and Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Instead, Iran retained the same intelligence structure, which ultimately manifested in a massive assassination campaign inside the country.
Netanyahu has made it explicitly clear that Israel is seeking a “Libyan solution” for Iran—meaning leadership decapitation and regime change. The nuclear issue is, in my opinion, secondary, and Iran bears responsibility for it. By deciding to enrich uranium up to 60% and claiming it was for peaceful purposes, Iran essentially made itself a nuclear threshold state without actually acquiring nuclear weapons. This naturally provided the pretext for JCPOA I and II. On top of that, Iran fell into the trap of negotiations and allowed the IAEA inside the country, which, through Plantier and Mosaic, allegedly gathered data and shared it with the US and Israel.
– How do you assess the mediation potential and prospects of official Baku in this conflict?
Baku has strong ties with Israel, and fostering a similar relationship with Iran could create a situation where Iran might consider Azerbaijan a potential mediator. However, as far as I know, Iran harbours considerable resentment towards Baku, and under the current circumstances, it is highly unlikely that Iran would agree to such an arrangement.
– The alleged US attack on three Iranian nuclear facilities was manipulative, premeditated, and aimed to fulfill the promise to Israel.” What can you say about this?
The attacks on the three nuclear facilities were, in my understanding, symbolic—as was the counterattack on the US airbase in Qatar. Both targets were reportedly evacuated beforehand and sustained minimal damage. As far as Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile is concerned, circumstantial evidence suggests it is safe at some undisclosed location.
As I have stated earlier, Iran’s decision to become a nuclear threshold state without proceeding to weaponisation has proven fatal. Now, Iran is left with two choices:
Build its own nuclear deterrent;
Agree to the Chinese and Russian proposal and sign a holistic security deterrence package.
– As reported, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu discussed retaliatory airstrikes against Iran during his July 7 visit to the United States and meeting with President Donald Trump. According to the Axios portal, Israeli authorities believe that if Tehran removes enriched uranium from damaged nuclear facilities, US President Donald Trump may authorize new attacks on the Islamic Republic. In addition, the US has imposed sanctions on 22 foreign companies linked to Iran. The decision was made in connection with the fact that these companies facilitate the sale of Iranian oil, which benefits a branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Will the US support negotiations with Iran this time, or attack it?
-As Trump tries to navigate between the MAGA base and Israeli hardliners, symbolic attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities may suffice for the MAGA crowd—alongside amplified rhetoric about obliteration. However, the Zionist lobby around Trump is dissatisfied with the diplomatic camouflage of a regime change operation. They want complete surrender and the Balkanisation of Iran—a dysfunctional, Syria-like state, easy to manipulate and manoeuvre. Thus, Trump is under pressure to attack Iran again, albeit under the pretext of targeting its nuclear programme.
It is high time for Iran to conduct a reality check and make a clear threat assessment. I believe there is a group within Tehran’s power corridors that is infatuated with the idea of a westward alignment. These voices are generating strategic ambiguity and unnecessarily putting Iran at risk. Iran has already been sanctioned enough, yet it has survived. New sanctions will not impose any significant additional burden. What Iran must understand is that its future lies within the region, and the hope that the West will abandon its long-standing strategy of destabilising the region to leverage Israel is a fool’s paradise.
-How likely is it that the war will resume in the near future? If the war intensifies and becomes more destructive, what will be the fate of the 40 million Azerbaijanis living in Iran?
If Iran is attacked again and the assault is not strategic but instead involves indiscriminate bombing, the Iranian population will suffer massive casualties across all ethnic groups—be they Persian, Kurdish, Baloch, or Azerbaijani. However, at the end of the day, we must recognise that Iran is a multi-ethnic nation-state. These ethnicities can, at times, act as fault lines, but at other times, they also serve as sources of strength.
-Who do Israel and the US want to see in power in Iran? Is there a vital threat to the current Iranian government?
The current Iranian government is indeed facing an existential threat. This became evident during the twelve-day war, when the Iranian population largely consolidated and stood behind the regime, clearly signalling their rejection of any regime-change operation aimed at installing Reza Shah’s son. However, for Israel, the removal of the current Iranian government is essential to advance to the next phase—which, arguably, has already begun. Reports concerning HTS and Al-Julani in Syria suggest that expected attacks on Iraq, Lebanon, and Jordan are intended to carve out a controllable region for Israel by the current Syrian regime. In this context, Iran—and more specifically, its current government—remains the key lynchpin.
Interviewed by Gülnar Salimova
