Staff ReportsIn the ever-tumultuous world of geopolitics, where enemies are besties for convenience’s sake, we have yet another ceasefire to talk about. This time, it’s a “truce” between the usual suspects: Iran, Israel, and the United States. The question du jour is how long this particular ceasefire will grace us with its presence. According to a retired U.S. Army Colonel, the hope is for a few months, but history has shown us that ceasefires are about as stable as a house of cards in a windstorm.
Efforts to make sense of ceasefires throughout history reveal a pattern: lots of finger-pointing and even more mishaps. Skepticism always prevails, thanks to the deep-rooted distrust among the parties involved. Whether Israel and Iran will refrain from exchanging fire long enough for peace talks is another question altogether. The Colonel was keen to remind everyone that ceasefires don’t equate to peace, just like putting a band-aid over a gaping wound doesn’t quite do the trick.
Speaking of history, the Colonel’s outlook on lasting peace seems more pessimistic than optimistic. Thanks to the decades-long cycles of violence between Israel and Iran, it’s hard to envision a peaceful future without a hefty portion of discord and hostility. The recent surge in violent clashes adds another layer of complexity, making it apparent that stabilizing relations isn’t going to be as straightforward as one might hope. One can always count on the Ayatollah’s rhetoric and Israel’s missile watch doggedness to mix things up even further.
Moreover, Iran’s position has reportedly degraded to levels never seen before, due in part to its diminished nuclear brewing capabilities and shaky regional influence. Groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran’s long-favored associates, are facing setbacks of their own. Iran’s inability to flaunt its might in Syria adds to their woes, along with the sense that Russia, their supposed ally, has taken a back seat just when they need support the most. If Iran’s regional grip weren’t lax enough, it also faces growing internal dissent, posing a threat just as menacing as its external disputes.
As if things weren’t chaotic enough, the Colonel assured viewers that Israel isn’t about to let down its guard. Should there be any inkling of nuclear advancements within Iran, Israel seems ready to make their displeasure known in no uncertain terms. With this powder keg, Israel’s deterrence policy post-October 7th stands as a testament to its vigilance and isn’t to be underestimated. Trying a less combative approach by signing Israel’s ceasefire agreement seems to be as likely an option as ice skating in July. Restraint and ceasefires are easier preached than practiced in the realm of high-stakes international relations.
