Expert: The conflict between Washington, Tel Aviv,Tehran is "zero-sum game"

In light of the ongoing conflict between the United States and Israel on one side and Iran on the other, and the concerns it raises about the future of the region and the balance of power, our agency conducted an interview with journalist and Iranian affairs expert Jamal Raef to understand his perspective on the nature of this conflict and its potential repercussions on Iran, its regional influence, and the future of its arms in the Middle East.

The Iranian affairs expert, Jamal Raef, believes that the ongoing conflict between the United States and Israel on one side, and Iran on the other, is a "zero-sum war" from which no party can emerge victorious, asserting that its repercussions will be harsh on all parties, albeit to varying degrees.

He points out that Iran is facing deep political, military, and economic losses, along with a decline in its regional influence and a diminishing ability to "mobilize its arms" in the region, making the future of its regional role more difficult and complex.

Jamal told ANHA agency: "There is no winner in this zero-sum war; rather, everyone is a loser on levels that may vary and differ. However, we cannot say that anyone will emerge victorious from the American-Israeli war on one side and the Iranian war on the other. The repercussions of this war are extremely difficult for all parties involved."

He added that "the Iranian side, in particular, is facing significant political losses that cannot be compensated in the near future. The loss of the Supreme Leader and the first ranks of Iranian political and military leadership is a loss that requires, or will require, a lot of time to rebuild. This also affects the popularity of the internal political system."

He continued: "The depletion of Iranian military capabilities and their rebuilding will require a lot of money and a lot of time, and this will multiply the Iranian losses after the war, if it ends." And even in terms of the popularity of the Iranian regime on the street, perhaps after the war ends, the Iranian political system will find itself alone in front of its people. Consequently, there might be a significant decline in the popularity of the Iranian political system domestically, after it has lost much of its base that was directly influential on the Iranian street.

He pointed out that "Iran is heading toward significant political, military, and economic losses, and thus all these losses will not even allow it to play a larger regional role in the coming period, especially since it has the biggest loss, which is the loss of its regional surroundings."

He explained that "Iran's blatant aggressions against the Arab region and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries have deprived it of the ability to communicate or quickly repair these relations after the war. In fact, this matter will require a long time, and the loss of trust between the Arab side and the Iranian side is extremely dangerous, depriving Iran of any opportunity to play a regional role."

He emphasized that "talking about playing a regional role cannot happen without communication with the Arab side, which is also a significant and effective regional influencer. It is a major power in the region, and therefore, on the aspect of playing a regional role, this might be difficult."

He added, "Yes, this war might have an impact on the balance of power, but not significantly, rather in a very limited way; because it comes within the context of the major changes occurring in the international and regional spheres, and therefore it cannot be primarily relied upon to change the balance of power."

Regarding Iranian influence in the region, Jamal said, "Iranian influence has indeed begun to wane, and Iran has lost its ability to maneuver its arms in the region, and this is imminent, especially with what we are witnessing, for example, concerning the Houthis."

He added: "The Houthis have become a relatively detached arm from the Iranian side, and they no longer operate according to the Iranian vision, especially since this arm has not moved so far, and it won't move, by the way, perhaps because there is a conspiracy between the Houthis and the American side, which was previously evident in direct talks between the Houthis and the United States."

He continued: "As for Hezbollah, this arm will also be paralyzed in the near future, with the Lebanese state negotiating for itself, controlling its own resources, the Lebanese army taking control of southern Lebanon, restricting weapons to the state, and the cohesion of the Lebanese state and its ability to support its national institutions." All of these factors also make the idea of the Iranian arm in Lebanon come to a halt or paralysis, if you will.

He confirmed that "Iran's loss of influence or its ability to move its arms in the region will cost it a lot of influence, and this measure can also be applied to other arms."

He concluded by saying, "The influence that Iran is currently seeking may be limited to the Strait of Hormuz. They are trying to find a new space for influence by controlling the strait, but this is impossible and illogical and will not be achieved, as it is an international shipping lane. Not only the United States but the entire international community will not accept this, because it concerns the interests of the whole world."

He added: "It is not the right of Iran or anyone else to impose influence or control over the Strait of Hormuz. Therefore, I believe that Iran's insistence on this card is not politically wise; rather, it is a very reckless move that will lead Iran to lose many of its relations with various countries around the world and corner it in front of the international community."

The journalist and expert on Iranian affairs, Jamal Raef, is a media figure and researcher specializing in Iranian issues and shifts in regional influence in the Middle East. He provides political analyzes thru interviews and media articles.

ANHA