The recent events on the Israeli-Iranian front carry significance not only in regards to Iran’s nuclear threat, but also as a potential change in the Western paradigm of foreign engagment.
“Yesterday, December 7, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked…”
Those words of FDR after the brutal attack on Pearl Harbor marked the last time the West engaged in a decisive and successful foreign intervention. The US joining WWII changed the world, and put the United States of America on the world stage of international affairs, as an active player that shapes the world order. While the lessons the West learned from WWI was idealism, restraint and isolationism, the lessons from WWII was activism, and total surrender of evil. Since then, a few decades of bad experiences on foreign interventions, and of course the collapse of the USSR, marked the resuscitation of the isolationism paradigm.
Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. From Republican Richard Nixon in 1970- “America cannot—and will not—conceive all the plans, design all the programs, execute all the decisions, and undertake all the defense of the free nations of the world.”, Through Democratic Obama in 2013- “The United States should not and cannot intervene every time there’s a crisis in the world.” , to Republican commentator Tucker Carlson in 2023- “What does any of this have to do with us? It’s not our fight.”. Even conservative President Reagan, who included Israel in his “special relationship” framework, publicly condemned the 1981 Israeli strike on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear site, supported the UN Security Council condemnation, and suspended F‑16 deliveries as a signal that even allies must face consequences for unsanctioned military actions.
Across the political spectrum, the US, and much of the west, followed and adopted a paradigm of restraint. Whether it was concern for American interests, a reluctance to deploy U.S. troops and pay the price in foreign wars, or an ideology of purchasing quiet at any cost. This paradigm, among others, contributed to Iran edge dangerously close to nuclear capability.
Even after the October 7th massacre, the western world responded mainly with words and abstained to act. De- escalation was the superior goal of the Biden administration in Gaza, in Lebanon, and clearly on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. For decades, Iran built itself as a threatened power, spread chaos, and deterred the west. No American president took action, and the JCPOA that the Obama administration had signed with Iran in 2015, caused even more damage. The fear of the monster, yet again, led the west to choose dishonor and descended the region to war.
Trump’s return to office brought refreshing change in rhetoric. But the MAGA wing of the Republican party remains deeply isolationist, and continues to resist significant American involvement in foreign conflict. On June 12, a day before Israel’s strike in Iran, the MAGA podcaster Jack Posobiec tweeted: “A direct strike on Iran right now would disastrously split the Trump coalition. Trump smartly ran against starting new wars, this is what the swing states voted for – the midterms are not far and Congress’s majority is already razor-thin. America First!”. On the day of the strike, on his podcast war room, Steve Bannon stated: “We don’t oppose Israel being Israel first, but we have to be America first. The bottom line is we cannot be dragged into a war on the Eurasian landmass or in the Middle East”.
American left wing has also participated in the efforts to de- escalate the Israel- Iran conflict. On June 12, Democrat senator Tim Kaine stated: “I am deeply concerned about the escalating hostilities between Israel and Iran and the risks for U.S. personnel and citizens in the region… We must always defend U.S. personnel and assets against those who might seek to harm us, but the American people have no interest in another forever war.” Senator Jack Reed said:” Israel’s alarming decision to launch airstrikes on Iran is a reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence”.
Despite the bipartisan opposition to the Israeli attack, president Trump was determined to end the Iranian nuclear saga. Yet it was Israel who spurred the United States into action. Israel, repeatedly in the past two years, proved itself and reminded the west that stabilizing the international system requires the demonstration of strength. The fear barrier has been gradually shattered since October 7th, and got into the current peak of attacking Iran. What convinced Trump to join the attack was not the courage and the sense of destiny that Netanyahu holds. It was the outstanding achievements on the battlefield that encouraged the Americans to conduct one of the most massive attacks that the world has seen.
While damaging the Iranian nuclear project is a major achievement, there is even a bigger and deeper meaning in the latest dramatic events, which can be summed up in three points:
The Clash of civilizations
Israel’s successes to get the United States to join and attack Iran is a true diplomatic piece of art. PM Netanyahu and Minister Dermer, reports says, worked hard on creating strong relations with the pro- Israeli part of Trump administration since they took office, and probably before. But there is more than immediate interests in this powerful bonding between the two states. This extraordinary coordination lies in the understanding that this is the forefront of the clash between two opposite civilizations. Of course, there are pure interests involved here, but Netanyahu worked to build this narrative in the American audience since his last speech in the congress in July 2024, stating that “Our enemies are your enemies, our battle is your battle, and our victory will be your victory”. Israel’s actions have the potential to unite a fragmented West around a common moral and strategic cause.
Israel as a regional superpower
Since its foundation, Israel saw itself as a small and resource-less country. Israel’s national security doctrine states that the balance of power in the region is not in favor of Israel, to say the least, it should always seek for a western superpower to hold in. This doctrine, however, led to dependency in the US, and to excessive caution in the last decades. No more.
Israel should see itself from now on as a regional superpower. That means independence in terms of force development, policy, and enforcement of the outcomes of the current war. Initiative proved itself useful, and as the efficient way to rally other superpowers.
Israel as a moral compass
Lastly, Israel’s unique position between east and west holds the key to change the paradigm of passivism. Israel demonstrated not only power, but also resilience, patriotism, determination, and above all- moral clarity. The gradual erosion of the Iranian octopus, from its arms up to its head, brought to the west a gradual distinction between good and evil. It is tragic that it took an event like October 7th for the West to break through its paralysis, but once it happened, Israel acted as the old Jewish moral key: “He who rises to kill you — rise earlier and kill him first”.
Israel’s actions hold great potential to change not only the region, but the world, through the influence it has on an America that becoming great again, and the two states can lead the west to a major shift in world order. This is the greatest achievement of these historic days — and it is what must be preserved moving forward.