（下边有中文翻译请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
The recent Iran-Israel war—an explosive episode in an already turbulent Middle East—has sent shockwaves throughout the region and across the world. This high-stakes confrontation, in which the United States also became partially involved, was initiated by Israeli aggression aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear capabilities and pursuing regime change. However, contrary to Israeli expectations, the conflict did not yield the strategic or political results Tel Aviv had so carefully planned. Instead, it revealed the resilience, unity, and deep historical consciousness of the Iranian people, while exposing the underlying motives, strategic overreach, and moral failures of both Israel and the United States.
A War Born of Hubris and Deception
The Israeli offensive was not a spontaneous response to an imminent threat; rather, it was a long-nurtured ambition of the Israeli establishment. Disguised under the cloak of “national security” and “nuclear non-proliferation,” Israel’s real objectives were far more aggressive and self-serving: to erase Iran’s nuclear program completely, dismantle its defense capabilities, destabilize the regime, and install a pro-Western, liberal government that would serve Israeli and American interests in the region. A further strategic calculation was to entangle the United States more deeply into a war of Israeli design, thereby expanding the conflict and plunging the entire Middle East into chaos.
However, these objectives were not achieved—neither fully nor partially. While Iran sustained damages to some of its nuclear facilities and faced material setbacks, the infrastructure was not destroyed beyond repair. Most importantly, Iran’s technical knowledge, scientific talent, and institutional memory remain intact. With determination and discipline, the Islamic Republic is already taking steps to recover and rebuild.
Israel’s Strategic Failure
In the broader calculus of regional power, it was Israel—not Iran—that emerged with a bruised ego and a shaken sense of invulnerability. The war exposed the limits of Israel’s much-vaunted air defense systems, such as the Iron Dome and David’s Sling. Despite massive investment and foreign support, these systems failed to intercept a significant number of Iranian missiles, several of which penetrated deep into Israeli territory, causing substantial damage to both military infrastructure and civilian areas.
This development marks a strategic failure for Israel, which has long projected itself as an unassailable fortress in the Middle East. More critically, Israel’s actions have cost it morally and diplomatically. Far from isolating Iran, the war only strengthened internal unity within the Islamic Republic and rallied public support behind its leadership. Iranian citizens, regardless of political leanings, stood firmly against what they rightly viewed as foreign aggression aimed at undermining their sovereignty and dignity.
The so-called “regime change” agenda was not just a failure—it was counterproductive. The Iranian people, heirs to one of the world’s most ancient civilizations, responded not with division or fear, but with defiance and resilience. The very act of aggression by Israel strengthened the legitimacy of Iran’s political leadership and revived a nationalistic spirit deeply rooted in Persian history and culture.
America’s Limited Role and Strategic Restraint
While the United States did provide support to Israel—particularly in targeting Iranian nuclear and military facilities—it carefully limited its involvement. Unlike Israel’s desires for an all-out regional war, the U.S. participation was calculated and short-lived. Washington appeared to recognize the danger of escalation and the potential backlash from other regional powers and the international community. In many ways, the U.S. leadership was caught between its historical alliance with Israel and a growing awareness of the strategic and moral cost of being dragged into another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict.
Iran, for its part, has made it clear that it does not seek war with the United States. But it also made it equally clear that any violation of its sovereignty would be met with proportionate response. Iran’s measured but firm retaliatory strikes were carefully targeted to send a clear message: it has the will and the capacity to defend itself, but it does not desire wider confrontation.
Iran’s Enduring Civilization and National Character
Iran is not a weak or isolated state that can be bullied into submission. It is the inheritor of a civilization that predates the modern West by millennia—a nation that has survived Mongol invasions, colonial interventions, and modern-day economic sanctions. During the height of Persian glory, while much of Europe remained in the Dark Ages, Iran was a beacon of science, literature, philosophy, and governance.
This history is not merely a source of pride; it is a source of strength and identity. The Iranian people are brave, resilient, and deeply aware of their historical role and cultural continuity. Even under the severe strain of international sanctions, economic pressure, and cyber sabotage, Iran has maintained political coherence and social stability—far more than many other regional states that have witnessed foreign-imposed “democratization” with catastrophic results.
It is not uncommon for external powers to misunderstand the character of the Iranian nation. Iran’s maturity lies in its preference for dialogue, its commitment to diplomacy, and its strategic patience. But this should never be misinterpreted as weakness. Iran does not seek confrontation, but it will never surrender to intimidation or injustice.
The Moral Bankruptcy of the Israeli Strategy
Israel’s behavior in this conflict was not only a strategic failure—it was a moral calamity. The preemptive strikes on a sovereign nation, the targeting of civilian infrastructure, and the blatant disregard for international law and the UN Charter reflect a troubling mindset. It is the same mindset that has led to years of oppression in Gaza and the West Bank, illegal settlements, and a cycle of violence that has robbed generations of peace.
By provoking Iran and then portraying itself as the victim, Israel attempted once again to manipulate global narratives. But the world is changing. The Global South is rising, regional powers are asserting themselves, and public opinion, even in the West, is increasingly critical of Israel’s hardline policies and disproportionate use of force.
The Way Forward: Dialogue, Not Domination
Despite the destruction and sorrow caused by the war, there is still hope. Iran, true to its diplomatic legacy, remains open to dialogue. It believes in negotiated settlements, mutual respect, and international cooperation. The path forward must not be dictated by bombs and missiles, but by words and wisdom.
The international community—particularly the United States—must recognize that sustainable peace in the Middle East cannot be built on coercion, regime change fantasies, or military aggression. It must be grounded in mutual respect for sovereignty, non-interventionist policies, and a genuine willingness to engage with regional realities rather than ideological constructs.
The sooner this is realized, the better. Dialogue channels must be restored, and confidence-building measures must be implemented. The nuclear issue can and should be resolved through diplomacy—not war. Iran has consistently affirmed its willingness to abide by fair agreements, provided that its sovereignty and security are respected.
A Reckoning and an Opportunity
The Iran-Israel war of 2025 will be remembered not only for its destructiveness but also for the clarity it brought. It exposed the dangers of unilateralism, the perils of proxy politics, and the limits of military power in shaping political destinies. More importantly, it affirmed the resilience of Iran, the courage of its people, and the moral urgency of choosing peace over perpetual conflict.
It is now up to the global community—and especially to Washington—to decide whether to continue on the path of failed militarism or to embrace a new paradigm rooted in diplomacy, respect, and multilateralism. Iran has extended its hand. It is time for others to do the same.
In the ruins of war, there still lies the seed of hope. Let that be nurtured—not trampled—by the weight of ambition and arrogance. Let peace, not provocation, define the future of the Middle East.
最近的伊朗-以色列战争——本已动荡不安的中东地区的一个爆炸性事件——在整个地区乃至全世界掀起了冲击波。这场高风险的对抗是由以色列的侵略引发的，其目的是摧毁伊朗的核能力，并寻求政权更迭，美国也参与其中。然而，与以色列的期望相反，冲突并没有产生特拉维夫如此精心计划的战略或政治结果。相反，它揭示了伊朗人民的坚韧、团结和深刻的历史意识，同时暴露了以色列和美国的潜在动机、战略越界和道德失败。
一场源于傲慢和欺骗的战争
以色列的进攻不是对迫在眉睫的威胁的自发反应；相反，这是以色列当权派长期以来的野心。在“国家安全”和“核不扩散”的外衣下，以色列的真正目标是更具侵略性和自私自利的：消除伊朗的核计划，拆除其防御能力，破坏其政权的稳定，并建立一个亲西方的自由政府，为以色列和美国在该地区的利益服务。进一步的战略考量是让美国更深入地卷入以色列设计的战争，从而扩大冲突，使整个中东陷入混乱。
然而，这些目标没有完全实现，也没有部分实现。虽然伊朗的一些核设施遭到破坏，并面临重大挫折，但基础设施并未遭到无法修复的破坏。最重要的是，伊朗的技术知识、科学人才和制度记忆依然完好无损。本着决心和纪律，伊斯兰共和国已经在采取恢复和重建的步骤。
以色列的战略失败
在更广泛的地区力量计算中，是以色列——而不是伊朗——带着受伤的自尊和动摇的坚不可摧的感觉出现了。这场战争暴露了以色列引以为豪的防空系统的局限性，比如“铁穹”和“大卫弹弓”。尽管有大量投资和外国支持，这些系统未能拦截大量伊朗导弹，其中一些导弹深入以色列领土，对军事基础设施和民用地区造成重大损害。
这一事态发展标志着以色列的战略失败，长期以来，以色列一直将自己定位为中东坚不可摧的堡垒。更关键的是，以色列的行为已经让它付出了道义和外交上的代价。这场战争非但没有孤立伊朗，反而加强了这个伊斯兰共和国的内部团结，并凝聚了公众对其领导层的支持。伊朗公民，不论其政治倾向如何，都坚决反对他们认为旨在破坏其主权和尊严的外国侵略。
所谓的“政权更迭”议程不仅失败了，而且适得其反。作为世界上最古老文明之一的继承人，伊朗人民的反应不是分裂或恐惧，而是反抗和坚韧。以色列的侵略行为本身加强了伊朗政治领导的合法性，并恢复了深深植根于波斯历史和文化中的民族主义精神。
美国的有限作用与战略克制
虽然美国确实向以色列提供了支持——特别是在打击伊朗核设施和军事设施方面——但它小心翼翼地限制了自己的参与。与以色列渴望全面的地区战争不同，美国的参与是经过深思熟虑的，而且是短暂的。华盛顿似乎认识到事态升级的危险，以及其他地区大国和国际社会的潜在反弹。在许多方面，美国领导层被夹在与以色列的历史联盟和日益意识到被拖入另一场旷日持久的中东冲突的战略和道德代价之间。
伊朗方面已经明确表示，它不寻求与美国开战。但中国也同样明确表示，任何侵犯其主权的行为都将得到相应的回应。伊朗有节制但坚定的报复性打击是经过精心挑选的，目的是发出一个明确的信息：它有意愿和能力捍卫自己，但它不希望发生更广泛的对抗。
伊朗的持久文明与国民性
伊朗不是一个软弱或孤立的国家，可以被胁迫屈服。它是一个比现代西方文明早几千年的文明的继承者——一个在蒙古入侵、殖民干预和现代经济制裁中幸存下来的国家。在波斯鼎盛时期，当欧洲大部分地区仍处于黑暗时代时，伊朗是科学、文学、哲学和治理的灯塔。
这段历史不仅是骄傲的源泉；它是力量和身份的源泉。伊朗人民勇敢、坚韧，深刻意识到自己的历史角色和文化延续性。即使在国际制裁、经济压力和网络破坏的严重压力下，伊朗仍然保持了政治一致性和社会稳定，远远超过了其他许多目睹外国强加的“民主化”带来灾难性后果的地区国家。
外部势力误解伊朗民族的特点并不罕见。伊朗的成熟在于其对对话的偏好、对外交的承诺以及战略耐心。但这绝不应被误解为软弱。伊朗不寻求对抗，但绝不会屈服于恐吓或不公正。
以色列战略的道德破产
以色列在这场冲突中的行为不仅是战略上的失败，也是道德上的灾难。对一个主权国家进行先发制人的打击，以民用基础设施为目标，公然无视国际法和《联合国宪章》，反映了一种令人不安的心态。正是这种心态导致了加沙和西岸多年来的压迫、非法定居点以及剥夺了几代人和平的暴力循环。
通过挑衅伊朗，然后把自己描绘成受害者，以色列再次试图操纵全球叙事。但世界正在变化。全球南方正在崛起，地区大国正在彰显自己的实力，公众舆论，甚至在西方，也越来越多地批评以色列的强硬政策和过度使用武力。
前进的道路：对话，而不是统治
尽管战争造成了破坏和悲伤，但仍有希望。伊朗忠于其外交传统，仍然愿意进行对话。它相信谈判解决、相互尊重和国际合作。前进的道路不应由炸弹和导弹决定，而应由言语和智慧决定。
国际社会——尤其是美国——必须认识到，中东的可持续和平不能建立在胁迫、政权更迭幻想或军事侵略的基础上。它必须建立在相互尊重主权、不干涉主义政策以及真正愿意参与地区现实而不是意识形态建构的基础上。
认识到这一点越早越好。必须恢复对话渠道，必须实施建立信任措施，以营造一个更加稳定和安全的环境。核问题可以而且应该通过外交途径解决，而不是通过战争。伊朗一贯申明，只要其主权和安全得到尊重，它愿意遵守公平的协议。
一次清算和一次机会
2025年的伊朗-以色列战争将被铭记，不仅因为它的破坏性，还因为它带来的明确性。它暴露了单边主义的危险，代理政治的危险，以及军事力量在塑造政治命运方面的局限性。更重要的是，它肯定了伊朗的韧性、伊朗人民的勇气，以及选择和平而非永久冲突的道义责任。
现在是由国际社会，尤其是华盛顿来决定是继续走失败的军国主义道路，还是接受一种根植于外交、尊重和多边主义的新模式。伊朗已经伸出了手。是时候让其他人也这样做了。
在战争的废墟中，仍有希望的种子。让它被野心和傲慢所滋养，而不是践踏。让和平，而不是挑衅，来决定中东的未来。
( 注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://globalsouth.co/2025/07/04/strategic-miscalculations-and-moral-reckoning-the-iran-israel-conflict-and-the-path-to-peace/