Who won the conflict and what are its regional and global consequences?

 

By Michael Pröbsting, Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT), 26 June 2025, www.thecommunists.net

 

 

 

Contents

 

Introduction

 

Who won the war in a military sense?

 

Who won the war in a political sense?

 

Trumps tactical triumph … leading him into Netanyahu’s strategic trap

 

The dilemma of America’s foreign policy

 

Some notes on the perspectives for the Middle East

 

A program of struggle

 

 

 

* * * * *

 

 

Introduction

 

 

 

The 12-day war between Israel and Iran has been a key event not only for the Middle East but also globally. This was a reactionary war of aggression by Israel with support of U.S. imperialism and a just war of defence by Iran. In this conflict, the RCIT and all authentic socialists stood for the defence of Iran – a capitalist semi-colony [1] – and the defeat of the Zionist-American monster. At the same time, we leant no political support to the bourgeois Mullah regime. [2]

 

While the situation is still highly volatile, we shall try to make a first assessment of the outcome of this conflict as well as its consequences. Naturally, such a balance sheet is of a very preliminary nature as many facts are still not clear or simply unknow. Nevertheless, it seems to us that it is possible to draw some important conclusions.

 

 

 

Who won the war in a military sense?

 

 

 

In a military sense, it is clear that Israel managed to inflict much more damage to Iran than the other way round. The Zionist Air Force killed not only hundreds of civilians but also 30 Iranian Generals as well as 14 leading nuclear scientists. Tens of thousands of Iranian civilians were displaced. Likewise, Israel destroyed some of their military infrastructure, in particular, many of Iran air defence installations, allowing it nearly unlimited air superiority in Western Iran (and partly also Central Iran). Add to this the massive U.S. attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan with 14 GBU-57 bunker busters – the most powerful non-nuclear weapons in the world – as well as 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

 

Unsurprisingly, Trump claims that the U.S. attack “completely obliterated” the nuclear facilities. Likewise, Israel says that it destroyed most of Iran’s missiles. While it is not possible to know exactly for now, there are strong reasons to doubt these claims. According to a preliminary assessment of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon's main intelligence arm, which was leaked to the media, Iran could restart its nuclear program in a matter of months, maybe even in one to two months! [3]

 

This is even more the case since it is widely assumed that Iran had removed its stockpile of highly enriched uranium and key equipment prior to the US attacks. In addition, the country retains the knowledge base to reconstitute its programme in full.

 

Furthermore, it has been reported that Iran’s problem in firing it long-range missiles in larger volumes was not caused by their massive destruction but rather by the skilful demolition of the entrances of the underground facilities where these missiles were stored. While this severely hampered Iran’s abilities to strike-back during the war, it would mean that these weapons might still be available for Iran’s military. In short, Israel’s air domination was decisive for the military superiority of the Zionist armed forces in this war.

 

Another Israeli achievement was the existence of a widespread network of agents which Mossad managed to establish in Iran. These agents were certainly very helpful to locate Iranian military personal and scientists as well as to carry out sabotage attacks and assassinations. Naturally, we don’t know how much of this network still exists after the clampdown by Iran’s security forces.

 

While Israel certainly came out as the stronger military force, it also suffered painful losses and Iran managed to fight back until the last minute of the conflict. According to currently available information, 29 Israelis died during the war and 3,238 were injured. Iran’s missiles regularly managed to overcome Israel’s air defence and did hit military or civilian buildings every night. As a result, Israelis saw significant destructions in Tel Aviv and other cities for the first time in their lives. Unsurprisingly, many middle-class Israelis fled the country via boats and yachts to Cyprus.

 

In addition, the war proved to be very costly for Israel – it spent $5 billion only in the first week – and its air defence weakened as it did nearly run out of interceptors. Furthermore, Iran’s air defence downed at least two Hermes drones and claims to have shot down more fighter jets and drones. In short, while Israel was militarily superior, it lost its myth of invulnerability as it is now clear that all parts of Israel can be hit by Iran’s missiles.

 

 

 

Who won the war in a political sense?

 

 

 

Following Clausewitz’s dictum that “war is simply the continuation of politics by other [i.e., violent] means”, Marxists assess the results of a war not only from a military point of view but rather by judging its political consequences. Israel’s war goals were to annihilate Iran’s nuclear program and its stock of ballistic missiles as well as to provoke a collapse of the regime in order to enthrone a pro-Western lackey – like the clownesque figure Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the last shah of Iran. ^[4] As we said in our statements during the war, this war was about subjugating Iran and establishing the unchallenged Zionist-American domination of the Middle East.

 

It is clear that Israel has failed to achieve these war goals. Yes, it weakened Iran’s nuclear program and missile arsenal but only to a limited degree. And while the Zionists could kill a number of military leaders, not only did this not provoke a collapse of the regime; Israel’s war of aggression rather massively strengthened the patriotism of the Iranian masses and rallied even liberal Iranians (including figures critical to the regime) to the flag.

 

However, Netanyahu could also register a major, maybe its most important, political success: luring Trump to military intervene in the war on Israels side. This is a victory for the Zionist state not only as it massively strengthens its military power but also because it increases the chances to force the Trump Administration to redirect its strategic focus back to the Middle East. (More on this below)

 

The war did not break Iran’s resistance against the Zionist aggressor but rather strengthened its resolve. The parliament unanimously (with one abstention) adopted a bill that fully suspends Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA, including allowing inspections and submitting reports to the organisation. The forces who want to build a nuclear bomb have certainly been strengthened given the experience of such an unprovoked Israeli aggression. The assassinated Generals are now being replaced by younger militaries who are said to be even more hard-line nationalists. It is not surprising that Iran hails the outcome of the war as a victory.

 

Some sectors of the Iranian establishment like the so-called ultraconservative camp protested against agreeing to the ceasefire. They saw it “as an abrupt end to a winnable war.” Hard-line parliamentarian Amir-Hossein Sabeti wrote on X: "Now, a nation more united than ever is asking in one voice: Why was there a ceasefire? We were ready for a longer battle to uproot this cancerous tumor." [5]

 

Having said this, one also needs to recognise the political failures of the Mullah regime. Effectively, it could not mobilise any military support for its war. The so-called “Axis of Resistance” completely failed to intervene in the war with the exception of the Ansar Allah (Houthis) in Yemen who, however, have not much military leverage given the geographical distance of Yemen to Israel. Assad is already gone; Hezbollah, severely beaten by Israel last autumn, did not raise a finger beyond rhetorical declarations; and the allied Iraqi militias did also fail to attack the U.S. troops or even to fire drones against the Zionist state. In fact, this is the result of the strategic failure of the Iranian regime to intervene in war much earlier, i.e. after the 7 October or at least when Israel killed the Hezbollah leadership and invaded Lebanon on 1 October 2024.

 

While all Arab regimes condemned Israel’s attack, none of these actively intervened on the side of Iran. Those states which have “normalised” their relations with the Zionist state even refused to cut off such diplomatic relations. Likewise did Iran’s most important international allies – Russia and China – not send them any military aid or impose economic sanctions against Israel.

 

Making an overall balance sheet of the outcome of the war, we can say that the war ended in an indecisive stalemate between Israel and Iran. Neither side could impose its will on the other. In fact, neither Israel nor Iran was calling for a ceasefire; it was rather imposed by Trump. In other words, Israel has “unfinished business” with its most powerful strategic enemy in the region. Furthermore, Netanyahu continues to look for forever wars as he heads a highly instable coalition government and faces his trial for corruption. Equally, Iran can not give up its nuclear program without seriously undermining its national sovereignty. Consequently, such a retreat would most likely provoke a severe domestic crisis of the regime.

 

As a result, we consider the current ceasefire as highly fragile. Iran will use the pause to enhance its nuclear program and to restock its air defence and missiles arsenals. Israel will also restock their arsenals and prepare for the next attack against Iran. In other words, we have entered a long-term period of direct conflict between the two states where armed confrontations and ceasefire alternate. Given the fact that Israel and Iran are the two most powerful states in the Middle East, it is clear that this is – in addition to the Palestine question – the main axis of conflict in the region.

 

 

 

Trumps tactical triumph … leading him into Netanyahu’s strategic trap

 

 

 

Any balance sheet of the 12-day war would be incomplete without analysing the major intervention of the U.S. and its consequences. This unprecedented bomb attack proved to be crucial not only because it was the first time that the so-called bunker busters were deployed in a war. It was also crucial because it opened the endgame of the war. After Iran had symbolically retaliated by attacking the U.S. military basis in Qatar on 24 June, Trump abruptly announced a ceasefire.

 

This was without a tactical triumph for the Trump Administration – its first foreign policy success since it came to power five months ago. First, it was a demonstration of the military power of U.S. imperialism. Second, this attack won Trump the admiration of Western Europe’s imperialist leaders – in particular Britain, Germany and also to a certain degree France – who had already expressed before their support for Israel’s war against Iran. Third, he single-handed enforced a ceasefire against the will, or at least without enthusiastic consent, by the two adversaries.

 

Such a foreign policy was all the more important for Trump as his Administration faces declining popularity at home, a massive polarisation as millions demonstrate against the racist ICE attacks against migrants as well as serious divisions within his MAGA movement as a significant sector opposes his joining of Israel’s war against Iran. [6]

 

Why did Trump decide to actively intervene in Israel’s war? It does not seem to us that this was a strategic decision. This is the case not only because the orange ADHD clown is incapable of formulating a strategy and even less to adhere to such. Trump also undertook a number of decisions in the previous months which reflected a shift away from unlimited support for Netanyahu’s Greater Israel policy. He helped to impose a ceasefire in Gaza against the Zionists’ will, he started direct negotiations with Hamas, made a deal with the Houthis (despite the latter continued to send missiles against Israel) and, most importantly, purged a number of pro-Israel hawks from the U.S. security apparatus. Likewise, he signalled a rather “soft” line at the beginning of the nuclear negotiations with Iran.

 

However, this suddenly changed when Netanyahu started his war against Iran on 13 June. What was the reason for such a change of mind? Israel certainly impressed the U.S. President when it managed in the first days of the war to kill many leading Iranian militaries and scientists. Trump probably got convinced that Israel could win this war against a “historic” adversary of the U.S. and joining it would offer the domestically embattled President a rare opportunity for a huge foreign policy success; a success which could, so he dreams, even spur the “normalization process” in the Middle East. In addition, Trump came under pressure of the extremely powerful pro-Israel lobby within the U.S. establishment of which Senators Lindsay Graham and Ted Cruz are leading representatives. Furthermore, Trump might have been blackmailed by Zionist forces with the files of the late Jeffrey Epstein, a notorious American financier and child sex offender. (Elon Musk recently publicly threatened Trump with these files).

 

In any case, Trump’s bombardment against Iran and the ceasefire which he imposed constitute a rare tactical triumph for him. At the same time, however, he fell into a strategic trap which Netanyahu had set up. By actively intervening in the war, claiming responsibility for the ceasefire and making “zero enrichment” his official program for Iran, Trump objectively – and probably against his intentions – took political responsibility for situation in the Middle East. In fact, this represents a strategic shift towards adhering to the Zionist program of redrawing the map of the Middle East in the coming years. Objectively, Trump has committed American support for the Greater Israel project to subjugate the peoples of the Middle East. His unprecedented intervention of calling Israel’s judiciary to close the trial against Netanyahu (a “ridiculous witch hunt”), because the Prime Minister is a “WARRIOR, like perhaps no other Warrior in the History of Israel”, is another signal of committing himself not only to the Zionist state but also its current leader.

 

Of course, nothing is decided. It is quite possible that Trump makes another U-turn and withdraws from Netanyahu’s forever wars in the Middle East. However, after the steps Trump has made in the past weeks, such a shift could prove very costly, representing a massive loss of face and most likely provoking uproar by the Zionist lobby at home.

 

 

 

The dilemma of America’s foreign policy

 

 

 

The recent developments underline once more the strategic dilemma for U.S. imperialism. As we have outlined in various documents, with global capitalism in decline, the U.S. is no longer the hegemon of the world. It is challenged by new imperialist powers – most importantly China and Russia – and its relations with its Western allies are in crisis. Washington basically must make a decision if it wants to focus on containing China (and its allies) or if it chooses a policy of détente with China and Russia and rather focuses on subjugating the Western hemisphere, i.e. mainly, North and South America as well as Europe. Given its declining forces, Washington must decide to do either one or the other – but it can not do both. [7]

 

For a number of years there has been a near consensus among America’s ruling class to undertake a “pivot to Asia” and to focus on containing China (and its allies). Obama and, lately, Biden represented this foreign policy doctrine most clearly. Trump, in principle, shares the anti-China strategy as his declaration of trade war against China in 2018 showed. However, he also looks for a détente with Putin, launches trade wars against the whole world ^[8] and publicly states his desire to occupy Canada, Greenland and Panama. ^[9] Both in his first Presidential period as well as in the last few months, he repeatedly argued for a retreat of U.S. troops from the Middle East.

 

Committing himself now to stop Iran’s nuclear program and to impose “peace” in the Middle East would represent another shift in Washington’s foreign policy which is incommensurate with focusing on containing China and its allies. It is evident that in one way or another, the U.S. Administration will be forced to make further shifts in its foreign policy.

 

All this reflects once more the highly instable character of the Bonapartist Trump Administration whose foreign policy – under the pressure of contradictory forces like the high-tech monopoly capitalists, the MAGA isolationists, the pro-Zionist lobby, etc. – zigzags without a clear strategy. Such zigzags – both in domestic as well as foreign policy – could continue since Trump faces mid-term elections in a bit more than one year. Hence, he will be under pressure to pacify his MAGA base which tends rather to isolationism, and which fears that the U.S. is drawn again into another Forever War. [10]

 

 

 

Some notes on the perspectives for the Middle East

 

 

 

The Middle East remains a highly instable region as Israel tries to expel the Palestinians, to subjugate the Arab countries and to destroy Iran as its most powerful rival. However, while Isreal has made some progress in its reactionary war of aggression – most importantly making Gaza nearly inhabitable, dealing a severe blow to Hezbollah and occupying parts of Syria – it is still far away from achieving its goals.

 

After 20 months of war in Gaza, it still has not managed to bring the small strip (in terms of size and population no larger than the city of Vienna) under control. Hamas and other factions continue to resist heroically against the Zionist invaders. [11]

 

As mentioned above, the Israel-Iran War has been inconclusive, and it is most likely that it will restart rather sooner than later (except the Mullahs capitulate in the negotiations or the Netanyahu government collapses and Israel descends into a deep domestic crisis).

 

While Israel has been militarily strengthened since the 7 October, albeit at high financial and political costs, it has been politically weakened. Its genocidal war has provoked an unprecedented global solidarity movement similar to the anti-war movement in the late 1960s. It has become a pariah state and pressure on governments becomes stronger and stronger to boycott the Zionist state, or at least to stop any military aid (or transport of such). There has been a global shift in public opinion, and it is telling that even in the heart of the imperialist beast the leading contender for New York’s next mayor, Zohran Mamdani, is a self-proclaimed socialists and a sharp critique of Israel who supports the pro-Palestine protests.

 

Nevertheless, U.S. imperialism continues to push Arab governments – most importantly Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Syria – to agree to “normalise” relations with Israel. There is no doubt about the capitulationist character of the Arab regimes which have all supported the Palestinian people in words but betrayed them by denying them any practical support. Likewise, there exists also the danger that the UAE, in collaboration with the treacherous “Palestinian Administration” led by Mahmoud Abbas, could try to occupy Gaza and to do the dirty job for the Zionists in crushing Hamas. Finally, one must also not forget the still-existing danger that the Zionists expel the whole Palestinian population from Gaza and implement another bloody Nakba.

 

However, at the same time these regimes are sitting on a powder keg as the Arab masses hate their rulers for their passivity in light of the heroic Palestinian resistance struggle.

 

Another factor contributing to the instable situation is the fragile state of Netanyahu’s government which could easily collapse as it faces deep hatred of the majority of the population who wants the Prime Minister to make a deal with Hamas to get back the Israeli prisoners of war. At the same time, Netanyahu’s ultra-orthodox coalition parties stubbornly oppose the integration of Haredi Jews into military service. Albeit Netanyahu’s liberal opponents are also Zionists and all of them supported the war against Iran, it is possible that new elections could bring a government to power which would stop the Forever War for a certain period in order to consolidate the overstretched army. Likewise, such a government would also be forced to deal with the alarming budget deficit of up to 7.7%, a challenging task given the fact that Israel’s economy has been converted to a war economy (military spending is 8% of its annual output). Add to this the danger of a domestic civil war as the extreme right-wing and fascist settlers might not tolerate a “liberal” Zionist government.

 

 

 

 

 

A program of struggle

 

 

 

In such a highly volatile period where the counterrevolutionary forces try to crush the resistance of the masses, socialists must intervene with a clear program of struggle. While the RCIT unconditionally supports the heroic resistance of Hamas and other factions, we repudiate their narrow-minded nationalist program. [12] The Zionist monster, supported by U.S. imperialism and guarded by corrupted Arab regimes, can only be defeated by an international struggle of the working class and oppressed masses.

 

The masses in the Arab countries must force their governments to break off all relations with Israel and to send humanitarian and military aid to the Palestinian people. In particularly Egypt, the largest Arab country, must break the siege, confront the Israeli army and help the brothers and sisters. Arms and Aid for the Resistance!

 

The global pro-Palestine movement and the workers and popular organisations all over the world must force their governments to boycott Israel. The Zionist monster must be boycotted by any means necessary – from blocking any arms deliveries, economic and financial boycott to the rupture of any ties of universities with Israel.

 

It will be decisive to revive the Arab revolution which should overthrow all the reactionary servants of Israel and the imperialist powers and to replace these with authentic workers and fellahin governments, based on popular councils and militias. Likewise, we reiterate that the only way forward is the revolutionary destruction of the Israeli Apartheid state and the creation of a free and red Palestine from the River to the Sea. Such a single secular and democratic Palestinian state would enable all refugees to return to their homes. At the same time, it would guarantee equal cultural and religious rights for all citizens (including the Jewish minority). It should be a workers and fellahin republic as part of a socialist federation of the Middle East.

 

As part of a revolutionary upheaval of the Arab masses, it will be possible to break a progressive section of the Israeli-Jewish workers and youth away from Zionism.

 

This task requires the construction of a revolutionary party – nationally and globally. Such a party needs to replace the existing nationalist/Islamist or reformist leaderships which are currently at the top of the resistance struggles respectively of the workers and popular mass organisations. The RCIT calls all socialists to join us in building a Revolutionary World Party committed to the cause of the liberation of the Palestinian peoples and all other oppressed peoples!