An Analysis on Military Confrontation between Iran and the Zionist Regime

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on West Asian issues said: In the last hours of April 14, the Islamic Republic of Iran launched a missile and drone attack against the Occupied Territories, which continued until the next morning. This was despite Iran's prior notification to some regional and transregional countries about the certainty of our country's response and military action; America and Israel could not prevent this attack.

In an interview with the website of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations, Saadullah Zarei stated: “Given that the Americans did not object to the Israeli attacks against Iran’s positions, especially in Syria, they should not have objected to Iran’s drone-missile attack on the Occupied Territories either.” They were accomplices in the terrorist attacks of the Zionist regime on Iranian positions in Syria. Still, later, they insisted that Iran should not take any action against the Israeli regime.

Zarei went on to say: “A country that made a revolution to maintain its independence and independence is one of its basic principles, naturally, based on requests that were sometimes accompanied by threats and sometimes by begging, would not abandon its firm resolve and would not act in line with recommendations of the enemy.

                                                      

By attacking Israel, in fact, Iran acted in compliance with its interests and expediency to stop the wave of assassinations against its forces.

Therefore, on this basis, the Islamic Republic of Iran carried out the operation on April 14.

According to this expert, it was after the missile attack by Iran that the Americans admitted that Iran is the superior military power in the West Asian region.

Zarei continued: “Iran’s action and the US recognition of Iran’s military power showed that the right way was what Iran did in response to the crimes of the usurper regime; the more important thing is that, unlike the military forces of the Israeli regime, which targeted civilians, Iran clearly hit military bases and targets.”

The expert on Middle East issues emphasized that the air base of the Israeli regime, which is located in the north of Dimona and was targeted, was the main center of planning against Iranian forces.

Zarei added: Iran’s action was a significant blow with the previous announcement, and while a defensive wall was formed by the United States, England, France, and several other countries in defense of the Occupied Territories, Iran was able to inflict a heavy blow on the military base of the Israelis regime to the extent that they admitted that it was like a hell.

Finally, Zarei explained the coordinates of the new Middle East and Iran’s place in it: “Iran has established its power, and from now on, both regional and transregional countries that have a military presence in the West Asian region have realized that they cannot ignore Iran’s military power.” He added: Surely, the security factor was very high for Iran and the whole region, and it showed that the region has a considerable defense power that can act with authority against the Western interventionist powers and set the stage for the benefit of the nations.

He added: “In fact, Iran’s military action shows that the region has the means of security within itself and that countries through cooperation can stand against  any insecurity phenomenon, whether internally such as ISIS or external phenomena like the US occupations in Afghanistan and Iraq over  the past two decades.”

0 Comments

LATEST CONTENT

The Makkah Pact Under scrutiny; From the “Deterrence Dilemma” to the “Risk of Disrupting Security”

SCFR Online – Opinion: The Makkah Pact, signed on August 7, 2026, between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, is more than an answer to geopolitical vacuums; in practice, it faces a “deterrence dilemma” and “differing threat perception.” While this pact symbolizes a transition toward regional self-reliance, its first field tests and the complexities of relations with regional actors will determine its real meaning.

Loading

Últimas publicaciones

The Makkah Pact Under scrutiny; From the “Deterrence Dilemma” to the “Risk of Disrupting Security”

SCFR Online – Opinion: The Makkah Pact, signed on August 7, 2026, between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, is more than an answer to geopolitical vacuums; in practice, it faces a “deterrence dilemma” and “differing threat perception.” While this pact symbolizes a transition toward regional self-reliance, its first field tests and the complexities of relations with regional actors will determine its real meaning.

Loading

DERNIER CONTENU

The Makkah Pact Under scrutiny; From the “Deterrence Dilemma” to the “Risk of Disrupting Security”

SCFR Online – Opinion: The Makkah Pact, signed on August 7, 2026, between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, is more than an answer to geopolitical vacuums; in practice, it faces a “deterrence dilemma” and “differing threat perception.” While this pact symbolizes a transition toward regional self-reliance, its first field tests and the complexities of relations with regional actors will determine its real meaning.

Loading

DERNIER CONTENU

The Makkah Pact Under scrutiny; From the “Deterrence Dilemma” to the “Risk of Disrupting Security”

SCFR Online – Opinion: The Makkah Pact, signed on August 7, 2026, between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, is more than an answer to geopolitical vacuums; in practice, it faces a “deterrence dilemma” and “differing threat perception.” While this pact symbolizes a transition toward regional self-reliance, its first field tests and the complexities of relations with regional actors will determine its real meaning.

Loading

DERNIER CONTENU

The Makkah Pact Under scrutiny; From the “Deterrence Dilemma” to the “Risk of Disrupting Security”

SCFR Online – Opinion: The Makkah Pact, signed on August 7, 2026, between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, is more than an answer to geopolitical vacuums; in practice, it faces a “deterrence dilemma” and “differing threat perception.” While this pact symbolizes a transition toward regional self-reliance, its first field tests and the complexities of relations with regional actors will determine its real meaning.

Loading