Zegrus Enderyari
Following Israeli airstrikes on targets in and around Tehran on Friday morning, explosions and air raid sirens engulfed Iran and the wider region, sparking widespread anxiety. Israel described these strikes as a preemptive move against ‘escalating Iranian threats’, but they have once again pushed the Middle East to the brink of a devastating war.
Yet at the heart of this crisis lies a bitter and complex truth: while the Islamic Republic of Iran bears primary responsibility for fuelling tensions through its adventurous regional policies and internal repression, the ultimate victims of these decisions are not the commanders or policymakers, but ordinary people.
For decades, Tehran has prioritised expanding its regional influence through proxy forces rather than addressing domestic crises or responding to its citizens’ demands for freedom, justice and economic well-being. From supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza to arming militias in Iraq and Yemen, the Islamic Republic has established what it terms the ‘Axis of Resistance’ — a network that has, in practice, drawn Iran into deeper confrontation, heavier sanctions and growing international isolation.
The recent Israeli strike is a direct consequence of these policies: an opaque nuclear programme, growing distrust from the international community and inflammatory anti-Israel rhetoric, which have provided ample justification for military action.
However, Israel’s unilateral attack on another sovereign nation’s territory — even under the pretext of self-defence — is a dangerous and destabilising act. While Israeli officials claim the strike prevented an imminent threat, launching such an offensive without international approval undermines its legitimacy. Even more alarming is the fact that the airstrikes targeted densely populated civilian areas in eastern Tehran, home to thousands of innocent residents. This should be strongly condemned by the international community. Self-defence cannot be used as an excuse to endanger civilian lives.
Inside Iran, the situation is equally dire. The regime has used harsh repression, including mass arrests, widespread internet censorship, the silencing of civil society and political executions, to maintain its grip on power. Not only have citizens suffered the consequences of the regime’s costly foreign policy, they have also been deprived of basic freedoms and rights at home. While the state is pushing the country towards external conflict, there is no sign of accountability or willingness to change direction. The Iranian people neither shape the nuclear programme nor dictate regional strategy — yet they pay the ultimate price through sanctions, insecurity and, now, foreign military strikes.
There have been opportunities to reduce tensions. The Biden administration has repeatedly expressed a willingness to return to the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA), but Iran’s hardline demands and provocative actions, such as increased uranium enrichment and regional proxy attacks, have pushed negotiations into a dead end. Tehran’s reluctance to finalise any agreement appears to be rooted in fears that renewed diplomacy might create more freedom within the country, which could lead to broader calls for political change.
If the Islamic Republic were to opt for a full-scale military response, the likelihood of a regional war would increase dramatically. Retaliatory strikes by Iran and escalated responses by Israel could draw in third parties, especially the United States and Arab states, plunging the region into a catastrophic scenario. However, there is still an alternative: if Iran stops supporting armed groups, rejoins international agreements and allows space for reform at home, it may be possible to prevent the Middle East from sliding into war.
The current crisis has brought the region to a pivotal crossroads. Four major scenarios now appear most likely:
Continued low-scale conflict: Limited tit-for-tat strikes by Iran or its proxies, and Israeli responses, remain localised.
Wider war: Hezbollah enters the conflict and fighting intensifies in Lebanon and Syria. Other regional or global powers also become involved.
Return to Diplomacy: Mediation efforts by Oman, Qatar, China and Europe attempt to reopen channels and revive the nuclear deal.
Heightened domestic repression: Iran is exploiting the crisis to further suppress dissent and consolidate its internal control.
All of these paths have profound implications, but the real losers in each case are ordinary people, from Tehran to Haifa, Gaza to Beirut and Baghdad, not the politicians who orchestrate wars from their fortified offices.
Ultimately, the Islamic Republic bears primary responsibility for the current crisis, with its repressive domestic policies and reckless foreign agenda. However, the international community must ensure that the Iranian people do not bear the full cost of these decisions.
While Israel’s actions may be understandable from a security perspective, they must also be held accountable when civilian lives are put at risk. The Iranian people are weary of war and of a government that neither represents their will nor safeguards their well-being. They seek only a peaceful life, a brighter future and a government that answers to them.
However, if these voices continue to be ignored and the regime persists in its confrontational approach, a stable and peaceful future for Iran, Israel or the region as a whole will remain out of reach.
