The historical evolution of the Iran-Israel conflict from alliance to enmity, proxy warfare to confrontation, reveals a rivalry deeply embedded in the region’s political and ideological fabric.

This conflict will solve nothing, and absent the collapse of the Iranian regime, it is quite possible that an even more consequential security threat may emerge in the future.

Israel initiated military strikes inside Iran in the wee hours of June 13. Ordered by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, these precise attacks are set to continue “as long as necessary”. The meticulously planned assault focused on military and governmental targets in Tehran.

The drums of conflict in the Middle East have once again captured global attention, with the long-simmering tensions between Israel and Iran reaching a critical point. While headlines often focus on immediate escalations,

Trump told the Wall Street Journal that he knew all about Israel’s plan ahead of time, that he wasn’t given a mere “heads-up.”

There are reports that Iran is considering the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The Strait of Hormuz is the most important oil shipping gateway in the world. Its closure would hurt the global economy. Iran’s shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz must not be allowed, in my opinion.

While the assault on Iran could turn out to be a devastating blow against the regime in Tehran, it also brings to the fore a bewildering range of outcomes, including some that can directly affect not

Lyakhov, the youngest nationally syndicated columnist known for his focus on Middle East policy, has spent the past year interviewing dissidents, former IDF soldiers, and regional experts. The message has been consistent: Iran’s nuclear program is not a tool for energy—it is a tool for leverage, and eventually, for war.

Israel’s prime minister sees himself not only as the protector of Israel, but the saviour of the West. This, he believes, is how he should go down in history, writes former Israeli diplomat Alon Pinka