In the struggle for superiority, peace was killed

The Middle East stands at a critical juncture. On one front lies the longstanding conflict between Israel and Palestine; on another, a covert but escalating shadow war between Iran and Israel. Together, these dynamics form a web of hostility where the promise of peace seems ever farther away—even though, in theory, both sides could shift toward cooperation that might reshape the region into a more peaceful Middle East.

Over the past three decades, Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly accused Iran of seeking nuclear weapons. Since 1992, when he first addressed the Knesset as a Member of Parliament, he warned that “within three to five years, we can assume that Iran will become autonomous in its ability to develop   and produce a nuclear bomb.” The prediction was later repeated in his 1995 book Fighting Terrorism.

In 2002, he appeared before a US congressional committee, advocating for the invasion of Iraq and suggesting both Iraq and Iran were racing to obtain nuclear weapons. The US-led invasion of Iraq caused tremendous civilian casualties and found no weapons of mass destruction—destroying a peaceful country’s hope for coexistence and creating fresh hostility between Iraq and the US, UK and Israel.

Now more than two decades later, in June 2025 Israel carried out its deadliest air strikes, killing nearly a thousand civilians.

For years, Israel is believed to have carried out numerous covert attacks on Iran’s nuclear programme – including cyberattacks and assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. For years, multiple Iranian nuclear scientists have been killed by car bombings or shootings.

In March 2025, the US Director of National Intelligence stated that the US intelligence community “continues to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized a nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.”

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, despite that intelligence, insisted in an interview with Fox News that “they (Iranians) were working, in a secret plan to weaponize the uranium. They were marching very quickly.”

In recent months, the crisis intensified. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) described Iran’s uranium enrichment to 60 per cent as “of serious concern” because “no other country has enriched to that level without producing nuclear weapons”. In an interview with Al Jazeera on June 19 2025, IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi told: “We have not seen elements to allow us, as inspectors, to affirm that there was a nuclear weapon that was being manufactured or produced somewhere in Iran.” He emphasised that the Agency “did not have any proof of a systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon” on Iran’s part.

That gap between Israel’s claims and the official inspection-body’s findings illustrates one of the region’s central contradictions.

Iran claims its nuclear programme is peaceful and insists it is not seeking a nuclear weapon. On 24 September 2025, at the United Nations General Assembly, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian declared: “I hereby declare once more … that Iran has never sought and will never seek to build a nuclear bomb.”

Iran will not seek to build a nuclear weapon unless the religious edict (fatwa) by Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, is reversed, as it forbids nuclear weapons. Former nuclear-chief Fereydoun Abbasi said in a Persian interview: “So far, we have not received orders to build [a nuclear bomb]. If they tell me to build it, I will do it.”

While the Iran–Israel duel draws headlines, the core conflict between Israel and the Palestinians remains unresolved and continues to undermine regional peace. For example, on 11 September 2025 Netanyahu declared: “There will never be a Palestinian state.” Under his government, far-right ministers in Israel have encouraged settlement expansion in the occupied Palestinian territories.

International law backs the view that Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal: the International Court of Justice on 19 July 2024 found that “the establishment and maintenance of settlements… are being maintained in violation of international law.”

Israel’s policy leaves little space for co-existence. There can be no lasting peace in Israel, and more broadly the Middle East, unless there is peace in Palestine.

It is worth asking: if Israel and Iran were to find a modus vivendi, could the Middle East become more peaceful? Arguably yes. Israel should engage in good-faith with the Palestinians, recognise their rights and respect the lines of 1967—or negotiate serious alternatives.

Iran is a signatory to the NPT and has worked under the UN watchdog. Iran accepts inspections of its nuclear programme and claims its uses are peaceful, while Israel, which is not a party to the NPT, is the only country in the Middle East widely believed to have nuclear weapons and yet seeks to dismantle Iran’s nuclear programme. The irony is unmistakable.

In Israel, far-right settlement expansion and rejection of Palestinian statehood dominate policy. They should respect international law. The IAEA and the ICJ have made important findings: Iran is in breach of obligations in its nuclear programme and Israeli settlements are illegal; enforcement mechanisms should be implemented.

The current strategic posture remains one of superiority and dominance. Israel continues to act pre-emptively, as Netanyahu’s long-time warnings about Iran show. In turn Iran speaks of strength and deterrence, and uses the Palestinian cause and regional proxies as part of its approach. Until one side sees security through cooperation rather than confrontation, the logic of “first strike, shadow war, dominance” will remain entrenched.

The phrase “In the struggle for superiority, peace was killed” encapsulates the challenge. The region is locked into a contest of power: Israel seeking to pre-empt Iran’s nuclear and missile potential; Iran seeking to counter Israel’s dominance and protect its own regional standing; and Palestinians caught in a system where their land, rights and aspirations are repeatedly delayed or overridden.

Yet the potential remains: a Middle East in which Israel and Iran no longer see each other as existential enemies, but as strategic adversaries capable of dialogue, would reshape more than half a century of conflict. For that to happen, Israel must begin to offer meaningful rights to the Palestinians, and Iran should re-assure the world of a strictly peaceful nuclear path. Until then, the contest of superiority will continue to overwhelm the hope for peace.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.