Proxy, Power,Pause: ‎Ballads of Ballistics,bluff

By  Tahir Jamal Baig
‎The recent confrontation between Iran and Israel stands out as a uniquely significant event in contemporary Middle Eastern geopolitics. For the first time in over five decades, a sovereign state launched a direct attack on Israel and sought to engage with full military force. While the exchange may not have led to an all-out war, its implications are profound, and its lessons—especially for Iran—are critical.
‎Instinctual responses to such geopolitical developments often cloud rational judgment. A minor tactical success is hailed as strategic victory, and when that illusion fades, public sentiment rapidly descends into disappointment. The Iran-Israel engagement followed a similar trajectory in the popular imagination, but a closer analysis reveals a more complex reality.
‎Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this conflict is that it did not escalate. It paused at the edge of chaos, as though guided by unseen hands reading from an old, familiar script. A few pages may have gone off-text, but the storyline remained intact. Analysts—those chroniclers of modern prophecy—had already whispered by week’s end that the war would not last long. It didn’t. And now, as talk of ceasefire trickles through diplomatic corridors, one senses this too had been rehearsed.
‎Yet the lull is deceptive. The ceasefire, like an intermission in a long play, is but a pause before the second act. A few weeks, perhaps a few months of uneasy silence, and then—inevitably—the thunder will return. Israel will rearm; Iran will reposition. The curtain will rise again. Some predict this cyclical theatre will continue for a year, maybe more—until all the “final” objectives are met.
‎Beyond tactical maneuvers, the greatest takeaway from this episode is for Iran itself. A year ago, Iran was diplomatically isolated in much of the Middle East. its reputation burned by the very fires it helped kindle. Tehran’s support for armed non-state actors—its so-called “proxies”—had contributed significantly to instability in Iraq, Syria, and Libya.
‎nations whose downfall was not written solely by Western powers, but co-authored by regional ambitions.
‎These countries may have survived internal discord had it not been for the combined interference of Iranian, American, Israeli, and French intelligence operations that sowed discord and weakened national unity.
‎Iran’s proxies—once its shadow army—have now become part of its burden.It’s past involvement in regional conflicts cannot be overlooked simply because it inflicted some damage on Israel in this latest episode. If Iran does not urgently reconsider its foreign policy orientation, it risks severe long-term consequences—even the possibility of internal fragmentation.
‎Worse still, the seeds of its vulnerability were sown in the soil of old partnerships. Its flirtations with American and Indian intelligence in Afghanistan may have seemed tactical at the time. But they bore bitter fruit. Surveillance gathered then is now a dagger pointed inward—mapping, tracking, exposing.
‎Additionally, Iran’s over reliance on proxy warfare has backfired. In anticipation of Iranian support for these groups, Israel and its allies had already constricted their operating spaces abroad. Arab states, in turn, responded by welcoming U.S. military bases on their soil—installations that now pose a significant threat to Iran’s strategic depth.
‎The much-publicized Iranian attacks on U.S. military bases in Qatar and Bahrain were more symbolic than destructive.
‎Iran, fully aware of the vulnerabilities in Israel’s advanced missile defense systems, also knew that similar systems protecting U.S. bases would struggle to intercept hypersonic or supersonic projectiles. Yet, Iran refrained from using such capabilities. Instead, it launched slower ballistic missiles—likely in deference to neighboring countries and to avoid a wider regional conflagration. This strategic restraint may also reflect Iran’s nuanced calculus vis-à-vis U.S. leadership, as strange as that may seem on the surface.
‎Or perhaps, in some ironic corner of its war room, Iran too believes Donald Trump, for all his chaos, might one day wear a Nobel smile.
‎As the dust settles, one question persists: What did America gain from this carefully contained inferno?
‎The answer is both old and expensive.By drawing Iran into a confrontation with the U.S. and Israel simultaneously, Washington succeeded in diluting Iran’s focus. So long as Iran focused solely on Israel, it wore the cloak of the aggrieved, drawing limited sympathy from the Muslim world and cautious concern from the West. America succeeded in what it does best—turning a conflict into a commodity.
‎The timing of Iran’s attacks on U.S. bases coincides with renewed American arms diplomacy. The strikes are likely to accelerate the finalization of multibillion-dollar arms deals between Arab states and American defense contractors—agreements originally brokered during President Trump’s visit to the region. The conflict thus reignites the cycle of regional fear-mongering: Arabs are once again being reminded of the Iranian threat, justifying their continued dependence on U.S. military support.
‎‎As the region braces for further escalation, in a corner of the regional amphitheater sits Pakistan—neck craned, eyes darting from left to right like a tennis spectator in the stands. It watches, it waits. The missiles fly. The players roar. The ball crosses the net again and again, and Pakistan continues to swivel in silence—waiting for the final whistle and a moment’s respite from the strain of uncertainty.
‎This was not a war. It was a message, a movement, a measured dance on the knife’s edge of catastrophe. It was a calculated show of strength, a diplomatic maneuver, and a psychological game played across the Middle Eastern chessboard. Iran may have demonstrated resilience, but the long-term risks it faces are far more serious than it apparently looks. The fire may be dimmed for now, but the embers are still warm. And as the winds of ambition, revenge, and fear begin to rise again, one cannot help but feel: the real act is yet to come.