Iran has surpassed the stage of immediate existential danger after withstanding American and Israeli attempts to overthrow its regime or divide its geography. This resilience has made talk of a 'post-Iran vacuum' seem like a relic of the past, yet the renewed drumbeat of war has reignited the discussion about who would truly benefit from any potential collapse in Tehran.
Some promote the hypothesis that Iran's defeat would open the door for regional countries to fill the vacuum and strengthen their regional influence. However, realistic data indicates that this proposition is misleading, as the only beneficiary ready to inherit this influence is the Israeli occupation, while Arab and Islamic countries would find themselves in the circle of harm.
Economically, figures show the fragility of the regional situation towards any widespread war, with reports recording a sharp decline in the Turkish Central Bank's reserves by about $26 billion. Ankara was also forced to sell massive quantities of gold to try and curb the lira's deterioration, amid expectations of total losses reaching $49 billion.
Economic damages were not limited to Turkey but extended to include a 3.1% decline in exports in the first quarter of the current year. The Turkish economy faces increasing challenges related to inflation and attracting investments, factors that entirely depend on regional stability, which is threatened by open war scenarios.
As for the Arabian Gulf countries, the repercussions of any comprehensive conflict would be more severe given their status as global financial and energy centers. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz or the threat to oil installations would lead to an economic paralysis that cannot be ignored, placing these countries at the heart of the storm instead of reaping the benefits of the supposed vacuum.
Security-wise, Turkey emerges as one of the biggest losers from scenarios of chaos in Iran, especially with the expectation of unprecedented waves of refugees. These waves will bring with them economic and social burdens, in addition to reviving the ambitions of separatist organizations that Ankara is striving to definitively close their file.
Militarily, the balance clearly favors the Israeli occupation, which enjoys unlimited American support and absolute air superiority. While regional countries like Turkey are deprived of advanced fighter jets like the F-35, the entity receives the latest military arsenals to ensure its dominance.
Dividing or weakening Iran strategically means removing a significant regional power from the equation of conflict with the Zionist project. This collapse would lead to the installation of regimes subservient to international powers, disrupting the region's balances and giving Israel a golden opportunity to expand unchecked.
The arguments about a 'quadrilateral alliance' comprising Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia to fill the vacuum seem hasty and unrealistic. This coordination framework still lacks the basic components of an alliance, foremost among them unified visions on fundamental issues and foreign policy principles.
Syria serves as a living example of what could happen in the absence of Iranian influence, where the occupation was the only party that expanded into the vacuum. Israel canceled disengagement agreements and deepened its occupation of the Golan, turning Syrian territories into a routine arena for its continuous aggressions.
The narrative that attempts to portray Iran as a greater danger than Israel is the product of long-term political and media work. This view ignores the fact that 'Greater Israel' is the project that seeks to redraw the entire region's maps, as openly stated by occupation leaders on several occasions.
Officials in the region confirm these concerns beyond academic analyses, with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan warning of the Israeli leadership's madness. Fidan clearly indicated that Turkey would be the next target of the occupation once the Iranian front is concluded.
In the same context, sources report the Syrian leadership's conviction that Iran's defeat would be the direct precursor to the occupation of Damascus. These statements reflect a deep understanding that the current war is not directed against a specific faction or country, but rather a war to reshape the geopolitical landscape of the region.
In conclusion, Iran's resilience represents a strategic protective wall that prevents the collapse of what remains of regional balances against expansionist ambitions. Awareness of the nature of the conflict requires overcoming ideological and political differences with Tehran and viewing the scene from the perspective of the region's higher national interests.
In this war, Iran represents a defensive wall against the ambitions of Israel and its allies, and its resilience is a real interest for the entire region, regardless of one's stance on its regime.
شارك برأيك
The Illusion of a 'Power Vacuum': Why Iran's Defeat Poses a Strategic Threat to its Neighbors?