US President Announces Ceasefire Amid Israel-Iran Conflict

The worldwide community was both confounded and relieved in the midst of the conflict between Iran and Israel when President Donald Trump of the USA announced a ceasefire on June 23. One day prior, he had green-lighted a bombardment of Iranian nuclear sites that Israel professed to have demolished during a 12-day airstrike operation. The U.S., however, appeared certain that, contrary to Israeli assertions, the Iranian nuclear installations had extensively endured the Israeli air raids.

After undertaking their intelligence evaluations, the U.S. was convinced that Iranian nuclear facilities were principally untouched. Hence, President Trump authorized the use of bunker-busting ordnance on American B-2 Bombers to strike the Iranian nuclear sites, reportedly located deep underground. This action raised concerns about an impending involvement of Russia and China, backing Iran, leading to a more widespread conflict that could potentially escalate to a nuclear war.

Given the recent attacks on Iran, doubts have surfaced regarding the U.S.’s commitment towards an air campaign and whether they are planning to deploy ground troops with the intention of inciting a regime change. There was also wonderment over whether U.S. intervention primarily intended to shield Israel from additional airstrikes.

Intel reports suggested that Israel was on the brink of exhausting its stocks of the ‘Iron Dome’ interceptors. This would leave the Israelis exposed to attacks by Iranian drones and missiles without interference. So, why did the U.S. step in? The answer can be traced back to Israel’s failed airstrike operation.

Despite carrying out an intense bombing campaign for nearly two weeks, under ‘Operation Rising Lion’, Israel fell short of incapacitating the Iranian nuclear sites and triggering a regime change. This failed mission forced the U.S. to intervene, a scenario closely resembling the Yom Kippur War of 1973.

The Yom Kippur War saw Egypt’s forces surpass the Bar Lev Line of Israeli defenses with ambitions set on Tel Aviv. This advancement caused a significant panic within the Israeli government. In an act of desperation, Prime Minister Golda Meir and Defence Minister Moshe Dayan dialed U.S. Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger.

During these desperate times, Meir and Dayan warned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against the Egyptian army, Cairo, and the monumental Aswan Dam. They feared the potential catastrophic consequences for Egypt and hoped the U.S. could offer some form of assistance.

To abate this crisis, the Americans provided Israelis with satellite images of the gap in Egyptian forces situated on the Sinai Peninsula. These images delivered crucial intelligence, leading to the deployment of Israeli special forces, the Sayeret Matkal, behind enemy lines.

The Sayeret Matkal disrupted the Egyptian forward operating bases and supply lines proving instrumental in the Israeli Defence Forces’ successful breach through the Mitla Pass in the Sinai desert. This tactical advantage allowed the Israeli forces to surround the stationed Egyptian forces. The standoff led to a ceasefire, ending the hostilities in the Yom Kippur War.

Analogous to the ceasefire executed in the Yom Kippur War, President Trump’s recent declaration also aimed at saving Israel from further damage from Iranian forces while also attempting to halt the likelihood of Israel resorting to nuclear weapons.

Besides immediate damage control, the mid-term goal of the American intervention was to persuade Iran to revisit the discussions on their nuclear capacities. The Americans hoped that the setback posed by the bombings might entice Iran back to the negotiation table.

Eventually, the U.S. aimed to broker a treaty similar to the 1977 Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel. They speculated that this process might pacify Iran and eliminate its perceived threat to Israel, Gulf Arab states, and Western interests in the region.

However, given the intelligence report findings that the American and Israeli airstrikes did not achieve their claimed obliteration of Iranian nuclear facilities, a change in tactics may be needed. Furthermore, the hope for popular Iranian uprisings against the Iranian theocracy has not materialized.

The recent conflict has allowed Iran to claim moral, psychological, and strategic victory against both its adversaries, Israel, and the U.S. The ceasefire, therefore, appears to be a strategic withdrawal by the U.S. to reassess the situation and damages inflicted on Israel.

Admittedly, the failures of the ‘Iron Dome’ interceptor and uncertainties surrounding the complete destruction of Iranian nuclear facilities indicate that the U.S. and Israel need to reassess their strategies. Paired with the absence of a desired popular uprising in Iran against the existing government, it suggests a potential return to further strikes.

The Iranians have seemingly adopted a more defiant posture, backed by their decision to retract from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The lack of cooperation at the negotiation table by the Mullah’s regime only fuels the American impetus for a more potent response, potentially arriving in the not too distant future.