Just when a US-Iran agreement appeared within reach, the Middle East witnessed another dangerous round of escalation. Iran fired multiple missile salvos against Israel following Israeli strikes on Beirut. The Houthis joined the pressure campaign with attacks of their own. Israel then expanded its military response with strikes reportedly targeting locations in Tehran, Tabriz and Isfahan, directly contradicting President Donald Trump's public call for restraint.

For a brief moment, it appeared that the region might once again slide towards a wider war. Yet the most important development was not the exchange of fire itself. It was Trump's reaction. Rather than support immediate escalation, he publicly urged Prime Minister Netanyahu to avoid a broader military response, insisted that negotiations remained close to conclusion, and continued arguing that a deal with Iran was within reach. The latest events reinforce an important reality: the struggle is no longer simply between Iran and Israel. It is increasingly between those who still see strategic value in escalation and those who believe the costs of another regional war have become too high.

Despite continuing military exchanges, the diplomatic track remains alive because most major stakeholders, including the United States, China, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the Gulf states and much of the wider international community, have concluded that the economic and security costs of renewed conflict are no longer bearable. The proposed US-Iran memorandum of understanding remains unsigned, yet neither side has walked away. Trump continues to insist that an agreement is close, Iranian officials remain engaged through multiple diplomatic channels, and regional actors continue working to preserve momentum towards a settlement.

The question, therefore, is no longer whether diplomacy exists. The question is whether the remaining obstacles can be overcome before spoilers succeed in changing the political environment.

Among the principal spoilers is Israel's current government. Prime Minister Netanyahu has never hidden his preference for maximum pressure on Iran. From his perspective, diplomacy carries risks because a successful agreement could reduce international support for future military action against Iran and strengthen those arguing for long-term political management rather than confrontation.

This helps explain why periods of diplomatic momentum are often accompanied by renewed tensions on one regional front or another. Recent events illustrate this dynamic clearly. Netanyahu appears determined to preserve military pressure at precisely the moment diplomacy is gaining momentum.

Tehran increasingly appears determined that any future settlement address not only nuclear issues but also........

© The Friday Times