There is a fine line between changing Iran and emboldening Israel’s extremists

There is simply no credible way to believe that Israel is waging the current war against Iran all by itself, or that the US’s role is limited to striking three nuclear sites over the weekend.

The distance, the military imbalance and the geopolitical stakes make it clear: this war is being waged with deep western support, both militarily and through intelligence co-operation.

And the objective? It appears military is no longer limited to reining in the Iranian nuclear programme. It’s about reshaping the power dynamics within Iran itself.

However, western powers would be playing with fire if backing this war is without a strategy for what comes after, as it means empowering a generation of hardliners in Israel, with many already embedded in its far-right government.

It’s true that Iran’s defences, meticulously built since the end of the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, are being dismantled. Hezbollah no longer holds sway. The new Syrian government has shifted course. Iraqi militias have their hands tied. A glance at the map shows how exposed Iran now is, with its cities vulnerable, its buffer zones dismantled.

Losing Syria as an ally was a decisive blow. Smuggling routes were cut. Border bases with Israel were lost. Syrian air space opened to Israeli jets. Syria, in effect, became a Trojan horse in this war.

Now, western powers, especially in Europe, the UK and the US, see an opening to break Iran’s regional hegemony. The demand for Tehran to completely halt uranium enrichment is one of the clearest signs that key European countries, for example, are shifting their positions to align themselves with Israel’s escalating campaign.

But Israel’s war isn’t a war for peace. It appears to be a campaign of revenge, fuelled by the illusion that Iran can somehow be fully controlled once broken.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, centre, British Foreign Secretary David Lammy and EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas after meeting Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva on Friday. AFP

Figures such as Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, two extremist ministers already sanctioned by European governments, are capitalising on this moment. If Iran falls, they won’t just claim that they have rewritten that country’s future; they will reshape Israeli politics for years to come.

The balance of power inside Israel could shift decisively to the far right, giving these ministers greater political weight, bigger parties and more control over policy.

The fallout would be catastrophic. The same Israeli government now accused of war crimes in Gaza and beyond would feel vindicated and unleashed. There would be no restraint. Their agenda of expansion, annexation and ultra-nationalism would surge forward, cloaked in the glow of their military successes.

This is one of the region’s greatest current risks: an emboldened, extremist-led Israeli state driving the Middle East into years – possibly decades – of instability.

For Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this war is personal. Despite having dominated Israeli politics for decades, he wants to erase his legacy of corruption, strategic failure and the October 7 catastrophe. He wants history to remember him not as the prime minister who failed to protect 1,200 Israelis from the Hamas-led attacks, but as the man who broke Iran.

His legacy today lies in Tehran.

Now the West must confront a sobering question: who is it really helping reshape the region? Because if Israel’s extremists are allowed to dictate what comes next, this will not be a short war. It will be a new order: chaotic, bloody and boundless.

There is a moral obligation for western governments backing this campaign to ensure that those they empower today cannot determine Israel’s course tomorrow. Many Arab states have already warned of the perilous line the West is walking. But history suggests western strategy in this region rarely looks beyond the next headline.

And if no one changes course, tomorrow could make today look like a warning shot by comparison.