Tehran- After 12 days of intense military strikes between Iran And Israel announced the American President Donald TrumpThrough Qatari mediation, reaching a ceasefire agreement, describing it as “unlimited and will continue forever.”
Trump said: The agreement took place between Israel and Iran completely and comprehensively, at a time when tensions escalated to their climax, to end the fully and sustainable combat operations.
But the Iranian official response came quickly and decisive, as Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqji denied a post on a platform XThe existence of any official agreement or signing of the ceasefire, stressing that “at the present time, there is no agreement or a stop for military operations, however, provided that Israel stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4 am TehranWe do not intend to continue our response after that. “
The last hours before the implementation of the ceasefire witnessed an unprecedented escalation, as the two parties exchanged the most severe and the nose of the strikes since the beginning of the confrontation, which increased the size of the losses and the tension of the situation.
“The initiative”
After the ceasefire was involved, several missiles fell northern Israel, and announced Tel Aviv The source of Iran, while Tehran denied this, and the Staff said that it had not launched any missile towards the occupied territories after the ceasefire, while Israel responded and carried out air strikes targeting radar sites in Tehran.
In the context, the professor of political science specializing in Israeli affairs, Mansour Praati, said that the official account of Tehran reflects a conviction within Iranian government institutions that the ceasefire, which temporarily began at the four dawn of June 24 before it turned into a permanent endowment at seven in the same day, came the fruit of Iranian attacks “that caused a new deterrent balance in the open confrontation with Israel and the United States.”
He explained to Al -Jazeera Net, that the official Iranian discourse focused on the fact that Iran’s strikes came in response to the Israeli aggression, and then the American side entered the confrontation line, and it caused – according to the Iranian novel – sufficient damage to the Israeli and American parties, and established what Tehran considered a “balanced deterrent equation.”
He pointed out that Tehran believes that, after the surprise she received at the dawn of June 13, it was able to restore the initiative within a few hours, so it was restarted by its defensive systems, before it carried out offensive strikes described as quality, targeting multiple Israeli cities.
“According to Iranian estimates, the size of the damage to Israel during the past ten days exceeds the total of the attacks agitation Since October 2023 until now, as well as what Hezbollah has caused during the same period.
He pointed out that the Israeli economic newspaper “The Marker” estimated the direct losses on the Israeli economy by about 5 billion shekels (about $ 1.5 billion), numbers that Tehran employs to emphasize the effectiveness of its response and success by imposing a high cost on the other side.
Conditions of negotiation
Peroti believes that the Iranian discourse does not hide his bet that these strikes have changed the accounts of Tel Aviv, and perhaps prompted her to accept the idea of calm, or at least not to oppose them, in an indication that Tehran considers a strategic victory.
But on the other hand, Pratti asserts that the Israeli -supported Israeli vision is formulating a different narration, as it considers that Tehran has received severe strikes that will need years to compensate, whether at the level of defense infrastructure or nuclear and missile capabilities, which Israel says has been severely damaged.
“Israel focuses on it succeeded in breaking Iran’s monopoly of its airspace, and promotes the idea that it has become able to carry out attacks whenever it wants, even during the ceasefire.” He adds that Tel Aviv is seeking to impose a new deterrent equation that any future threat will be met with an immediate response, which means that the current calm may be temporary and collapse at any moment.
Peroti concluded by saying: Any return to nuclear negotiations will not be imminent, as it requires – according to Iranian sources – the continuation of the ceasefire constantly, and the failure to repeat the Israeli attacks, conditions that Tehran considers necessary before thinking about sitting again to the dialogue table.
Agreement of the agreement
For his part, a professor of international relations, Jawad Hiran Niya, said that the announcement of the last shooting was carried out by Qatari at the direct request of US President Trump, and it came after a base.Many“In Qatar, an attack was – according to what was said – had alerted to it in advance, which made this response a low -cost political and military option for Tehran, and the prevention of the expansion of the confrontation.
In his interview with Al -Jazeera Net, Hiran Nia pointed out that the method of the unilateral announcement of the ceasefire from Trump, without a simultaneous announcement from the other parties, aims to show America as a party holding the initiative, and marketing it as the one who stopped the war and sought peace, and seeks to devote Trump as an international peacemake, as he did before India AndPakistanWhat may enhance its location at home and abroad.
But this formula of the announcement, according to Hiran Nia, carries a clear message to public opinion that Iran surrendered politically without conditions or gains, a reading that America and Israel tried to impose, as Tehran had previously been presented in the option of military or political surrender.
He added that Israel has achieved a strategic goal from escalation, which was an attempt to destroy facilities Nuclear enrichment The Iranian, especially the site “FordoWith direct American military support, with the use of miraculous bombs for the fortifications, Washington has prepared to do so by destroying the air defenses and Iranian radars, which allowed the implementation of air strikes without the mentioned military costs.
Hiran Nia considered that the attacks exceeded the nuclear dimension, so they also targeted missile bases, production factories and stores, as well as radar systems and air defense, which made the Iranian atmosphere exposed to hostile aircraft, which – in his opinion – “flying without harassment and hitting whatever you want.”
He warned that this aerial superiority may turn into a frequent pattern of preventive strikes, similar to what Israel is doing in Syria AndLebanonWithin the policy of “pre -emptive attack”, to consolidate air hegemony within broader regional arrangements that achieve the concerns of Israeli and American security, and are identical to projects such as the economic connection between India, the Gulf and Europe.
Determination pillars
On the other hand, Hiran Nia saw that the Israeli strikes were effective as a result of security breakthroughs inside Iran, which he described as deep and dangerous, and enabled Tel Aviv to carry out accurate strikes with the help of “local human elements”, which he considered an indication of the fragility of the internal security system.
Despite its losses, Iran – according to Hiran Niya – directed strong strikes to Israel, and revealed that the latter lacked the strategic depth, and that it would have incurred severe losses without the American intervention, and Tehran also confirmed that it had not yet used some of its missile models, in a message that reflects the continued missile deterrence.
On the ongoing negotiations, he explained that Iran rejected in the Geneva talks a condition of “zero enrichment”, and insisted on its right to local enrichment, which Washington used an excuse to attack “Fordo”, and despite the imbalance of the powers of power at that moment, Tehran adhered to its position, and nuclear knowledge is a sovereign and uncomfortable truly, even if it becomes – as some parties say – is not useful in the circumstance The present.
Academic Hiran Nia concluded that the next battle will be on the missile file, with a possible pursuit of restrictions on the range and types of Iranian missiles, especially in light of a clear field superiority of the opposite party, however, it is believed that Iran will remain on red lines, and will not be easily waived its two programs Nuclear AndMissileWhich are considered two basic pillars in the regional deterrence equation.