From Israel’s perspective, this is the ideal moment to strike Iran.
Globally, Iran’s two principal partners—China and Russia—are preoccupied. China, entangled in deep economic troubles, has struck an economic accord with the U.S. Russia, still reeling from setbacks in Ukraine, has received unmistakable warnings: “the submarine and the Crimean Bridge.” Neither is in a position to offer Iran tangible military backing. Meanwhile, the UK scrambled warplanes in immediate support of Israel. France maintains its rhetorical opposition to “Regime Change” argument but continues intelligence cooperation with Israel. Germany’s posture is in line with its Western allies.
In short, no major global actor is willing to defend Iran militarily—while several stand ready to reinforce Israel.
Regionally, the picture is even more stark.
The Gulf-West axis, cemented over years through debt, dependency, and shared interests, shows no intention of breaking ranks. Saudi Arabia’s tone toward Israel has softened significantly—Netanyahu’s quiet warning to MBS on Palestine has not gone unnoticed. Egypt, under Sisi, declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization and has since focused inward, undergoing a long-term recalibration. Turkey, a NATO member with a frozen EU process and economic turmoil, remains paralyzed by domestic strife. Despite its symbolic stance, it cannot act decisively.
In this landscape, Iran stands alone. It may sustain a drawn-out war of attrition—it’s done so before—but no state actor will march to its aid.
Israel, on the other hand, has mobilized the global order with deft use of its economic elite networks. As the English saying goes: “Money talks, bullshit walks.” Israel has both wealth and will. Its territorial ambitions, beginning with its immediate neighborhood—Palestine, Gaza—demand credible regional deterrence, underpinned by guaranteed and unlimited U.S. engagement.
That’s where Iran comes in.
Neutralizing Iran strengthens the logic of American military presence and gives Israel unchallenged deterrence in the region. The nuclear file provides Washington with legal justification; the broader play is about power calibration. Dragging Iran into a prolonged, painful war of attrition—or triggering a regime change open to Israel’s terms—may be less about total victory and more about strategic bargaining: demand everything, settle for half. A limited airborne strike and a special combat operation perhaps on Fordow, fits this logic. By the way, I am the first one to say this expectation. Not defense editors, chiefs, or senior analysts. I documented this prediction in X. I expect it to come true.
This isn’t reactionary. This isn’t panic. This is calculated.
Israel’s strategy is near-flawless in timing.
Washington knows well: it couldn’t exit Iraq for 20 years; it surely won’t leave Iran for 40. With Iraq’s price tag at $2 trillion, any plunge into Iran starts at $10 trillion. America won’t pay that—unless forced into a cost-effective, high-impact, limited campaign.
That’s the option now.
A hard, fast, destructive strike that compels decisions. Not nation-building, not occupation—just enforcement.
Israel and the capital behind it don’t plan these things to walk away empty-handed. It is, quite simply, richer than America—and far more focused. You can see it in the suppression of Gaza discourse at Harvard, in the silencing of protestors in Manhattan. Now, even DNI Gabbard is being squeezed to resign. Bannon and others are adding prayers to what looks like strategic despair.
As young Brits say in passing:
Money talks. Bullshit walks.
And Israel has the money.
This is the same old world:
Those with wealth use wealth.
Those with guns use guns.
Those with intelligence spread it.
And they know exactly when to strike.
Muhammet Ali Zurnacı, June 18, 2025, Istanbul
Three Corporate