International Observation: Talks Here, Fighting There, the US, Israel, and Iran Gradually Enter a New Game

Xinhua News Agency, Beijing, July 29 - Title: While talking here, fighting there, the US, Israel, and Iran gradually enter a new game

Xinhua News Agency reporter

On the 28th, US President Trump met with visiting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House, with both sides describing the meeting as positive and productive. On the same day, military confrontations between the US and Iran reignited in the Middle East, putting pressure on the days of easing tensions between the two sides.

Analysts believe that there is currently no mutual trust between the US and Iran, with both sides thinking that "the advantage is on our side," and Israel may be waiting for an opportunity to act. Against this backdrop, the US, Israel, and Iran seem to be entering a new game, and renewed clashes among the three may further complicate the situation in the Middle East, making it difficult to avoid escalation of regional conflicts.

US-Israel closed-door "brewing"

The meeting between the US and Israeli leaders was arranged relatively low-key. US media reported that Netanyahu entered through a side door of the West Wing of the White House on the 28th, and the meeting lasted nearly an hour and a half, closed to the media.

According to information previously released by the White House, the topics of discussion between Trump and Netanyahu included the situation in Iran, the "Abraham Accords" regarding the normalization of relations between Israel and Arab countries, and the progress of the trilateral framework agreement previously reached between the US, Israel, and Lebanon.

After the meeting, both sides released positive evaluations. Trump stated in a post that it was a "very good meeting" and "discussed many important topics." Netanyahu told the media that it was a "dialogue of comprehensive cooperation and mutual support," and both sides confirmed the common goal that "Iran cannot have nuclear weapons."

The Associated Press quoted Israeli officials as saying that Netanyahu expressed confidence in Trump's judgment of the situation in the Middle East during the meeting, understanding that the US has "its own timetable and considerations," and will continue to share relevant intelligence with the US.

The timing of this meeting is "delicate." In recent weeks, the differences between Trump and Netanyahu have become increasingly public, with Netanyahu hoping to "repair relations" with Trump through the meeting and strengthen coordination on Iran policy. However, Israeli media such as the Jerusalem Post believe that Israel has been "marginalized" on the Iran issue, with the Trump administration indicating to Israel that the US is the "dominant force in the direction of the conflict."

Some analysts have pointed out that Netanyahu is trying to use this visit to influence US decision-making on the Iran issue again. Former Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif stated that based on historical records, there is ample reason to speculate that Netanyahu would use this meeting to obstruct any efforts aimed at ending regional hostilities.

US-Iran reignites conflict?

Just as the US and Israel were coordinating their positions, conflict between the US and Iran reignited. In the early hours of the 29th, Iran launched missile attacks on a US Air Force base and command center located in Jordan. The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps stated that the strike was intended to respond to the "aggressive actions" of the US military. The US and Jordanian sides claimed to have intercepted Iranian missiles.

From the night of the 28th to the early morning of the 29th, attacks also occurred in Saudi Arabia and Iraq. First, Saudi Arabia claimed to have intercepted drone attacks targeting the country's oil infrastructure. Hours later, the US Central Command stated that US and Saudi forces struck multiple "logistical and weapons bases of terrorists" in Iraq in response to over 30 drone attacks orchestrated by Iran in the past 72 hours.

The Iraqi militia group "Popular Mobilization Forces," closely related to Iran, issued a statement on the 29th saying that its bases in multiple locations in Iraq were attacked by US and Saudi forces that morning, resulting in at least 20 deaths and 32 injuries. Another Iraqi militia group, the "Islamic Resistance Organization," denied involvement in the attack on Saudi Arabia, claiming that Saudi Arabia's statements were "fabricated." Iranian sources also denied any connection between Iran and the attacks on targets within Saudi Arabia.

Additionally, Iranian media reported on the 29th that the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy claimed to have intercepted three oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, stating that the attacks on these tankers were due to their disregard for multiple warnings to stop navigating along "unsafe and illegal routes." The Yemeni Houthi forces claimed on the 28th to have intercepted a Saudi oil tanker attempting to pass through the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait.

Analysts pointed out that although the US has not yet resumed airstrikes on targets within Iran, conflicts have erupted again in many parts of the Middle East, with the forces involved in the conflict continuing to increase. The competition among various parties over the two key waterways, the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, is intensifying, and the direction of the situation remains unclear.

The "talk-fight" deadlock is hard to resolve

Analysts believe that at this stage, the US, Israel, and Iran each have their demands, and the situation will continue to alternate between "talking and fighting" in the short term, with significant risks of escalation.

For the US, continued military strikes against Iran are not the "best strategy." On one hand, the US military is facing severe ammunition depletion, with US media reporting that military leaders are worried about the rapid decline of air defense interceptors in stock; on the other hand, the ongoing conflict is increasing pressure on the Trump administration domestically, further affecting the Republican Party's electoral prospects.

Harold Ulman, a senior advisor at the Atlantic Council, pointed out that the conflict with Iran has cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars, and the volatility of energy prices continues to impact the domestic economy and people's livelihoods. For the US, the more prudent approach at this time would be to resume negotiations with Iran.

Iran continues to demonstrate strategic resilience. An article in the British Guardian pointed out that Iran still possesses the capability to retaliate using drones and ballistic missiles and can continue to exert influence on regional security and shipping.

Iranian political commentator Saadollah Zarei believes that the future situation may take two directions. One is that the US and Iran fail to reach an agreement, leading to continued conflict, with Iran maintaining control over the Strait of Hormuz; the other is that the US and Iran resume negotiations, promoting de-escalation of the conflict. In either scenario, Iran holds certain strategic leverage.

Israel remains an uncertain factor. Despite the recent increased constraints from the US, Israel's intention to maintain or even expand military strikes against Iran and its regional allies has not diminished. Israeli Defense Minister Katz has stated that Israel "very much hopes to attack Iran's energy targets."

Analysts predict that with the Israeli parliamentary elections approaching, Netanyahu, who is accustomed to "using war to sustain politics," has a strong motivation to take advantage of the situation. If Israel takes action again, the direction of the conflict will become even more uncertain.