TEHRAN — Since the joint military strikes launched by the United States and Israel against Iran on February 28, the region has plunged into one of its most dangerous crises in decades, with escalating missile exchanges, regional spillover, and mounting civilian casualties. The attacks triggered a wider confrontation that has shaken global energy markets and intensified geopolitical tensions across West Asia.
In an exclusive interview with the Tehran Times, Palestinian diplomat Dr. Ribhi Halloum offers his assessment of the strategic objectives behind the war, its legality under international law, and the possible scenarios for the future of the region.
Below is the full text of the interview.
Based on your long experience in Middle Eastern diplomacy, how do you interpret the strategic objectives behind the joint military campaign by the United States and Israel against Iran, which began on February 28? Do you see it as a limited military operation, or as part of a broader attempt to reshape the political order of the region?
Iran constitutes one of the most important countries in the Middle East in terms of its geopolitical and geographic influence in the region and the world, as well as its deep historical, religious, and demographic roots that extend over centuries. This stands in contrast to the Israeli occupying entity, whose existence as a colonial occupation has not exceeded seventy-nine years. The United States, which sponsors and supports this occupation, considers it its instrument and striking arm in the region—one whose peoples and states have suffered for centuries from colonial ambitions before achieving their independence.
I am convinced that this Trump-era American confusion in its plans and ambitions—aimed at repeating the international crime it committed in Venezuela in South America—will not succeed. Rather, it may signal the inevitable beginning of a dramatic decline for the United States politically, economically, and historically as the world’s sole superpower, as well as a clear failure in its attempt to reshape the political order of the region according to its own desires.
Iran has described these attacks as a violation of international law and the United Nations Charter. From a legal and diplomatic perspective, how do you assess the legitimacy of these strikes?
These attacks and American ambitions have absolutely no legitimacy. On the contrary, they clearly constitute a crime of international aggression and a blatant violation of all international laws and norms, according to the provisions of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits aggression, threats of aggression, the use of force, or acts of aggression by one state against another.
The conflict has already extended beyond Iran and Israel through missile exchanges and attacks on regional targets. How likely is it that this confrontation could evolve into a broader regional war involving several states or non-state actors?
The continued escalation by the Zionist entity known as Israel—and its blatant violation even of the airspace of several countries in the region—along with its brutal attacks and savage bombardment against Iran, gives Iran every right to respond to this aggression. It also grants any state whose airspace is violated the right to defend its sovereignty and confront any aggression directed against it or its airspace.
Although such a scenario has not yet occurred, all possibilities remain open in light of these rapid and ongoing developments.
Several Arab governments have taken cautious or ambiguous positions toward this conflict. How do you interpret the reactions of the Persian Gulf region and the broader Arab world?
As an Arab who takes pride in my Arab identity and authenticity, I consider this usurping entity not merely my enemy but an existential enemy that threatens both the Arab and Islamic nations. This is especially true since it openly declares day and night that its expansionist ambitions do not stop at all of Palestine but extend to Jordan and Saudi Arabia, as Benjamin Netanyahu himself declared when he displayed the map at the United Nations platform with complete arrogance and audacity.
In light of this dangerous existential threat facing the entire Arab nation—from the Atlantic to the Persian Gulf—I feel bitterness and deep disappointment when I see the occupiers celebrating their dances in the courtyards of Al-Aqsa Mosque, while in some Arab capitals diplomatic relations are exchanged with them, their official delegations are welcomed, and red carpets are laid out for them.
The war has already affected global energy markets and strategic shipping routes such as the Strait of Hormuz. Could this conflict lead to a wider global geopolitical crisis involving major powers such as Russia or China?
It is true that Russia and China are not geographically or ethnically part of our regional arena, but they are two major powers that maintain friendly relations and shared economic and political interests with the Arab world. The same applies to their relations with Iran. The bilateral relations between each of these countries and Iran are characterized by friendship, mutual respect, and shared interests. Therefore, I do not believe that a broader global geopolitical crisis would necessarily harm these relationships.
What are the most likely scenarios for the end of this conflict: escalation, a negotiated settlement, or a prolonged confrontation?
I believe—with firm conviction—that Donald Trump, whom I consider to suffer from schizophrenia (a split personality), always works to achieve a goal that he sets for himself…
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: tehrantimes.com
