Wars often begin with the claims of necessity. They are justified more often as acts of defence, stability, or prevention. But sometimes the context of a war exposes the deception of the official justifications. The joint U.S.–Israeli strikes on Iran came at a time when both Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu face mounting domestic pressures. Trump has been weakened by judicial setbacks limiting presidential authority, growing political opposition, and the approach of elections. Netanyahu, facing declining public confidence and political fragmentation at home, has long relied on security crises to consolidate support. The present war must, therefore, be seen not only as a strategic action in the Gulf but also as a political move in Washington and Tel Aviv.

The attack has been justified as a response to Iran’s nuclear ambitions and missile programme. But the scale of the strikes and the rhetoric that followed point to a different objective. Statements from both governments suggest that the aim goes beyond restraining  Iran’s military capabilities, and thereby to ensure regime change. Calls for the Iranian people to rise against their government, combined with strikes on leadership compounds, indicate  that regime change is the prime objective of the operation. The question that immediately follows is palpable: if the regime collapses, who will govern Iran? No credible political alternative has been identified, nor has any transition framework been articulated. History is a record of such misadventures—from Iraq to Libya—of interventions that destroyed states without building replacements.

The legal foundation of the attack is also questionable. Under international law, the use of force requires either self-defence against an imminent threat or authorization from the United Nations Security Council. Neither condition appears to have been met. Claims of long-term hostility or future risk cannot substitute for evidence of immediate danger. The attack therefore sets a dangerous precedent. If preventive war becomes normalised, the........

© Eurasia Review