In South Africa, we are not strangers to conflict, struggle, and the difficult work of telling between truth amid competing narratives. Our history has taught us that understanding the complexities behind conflict is essential to building peace and justice. This is why, as someone who has closely followed and written about the Middle East, I find it urgent to clarify the escalating tensions between Israel and Iran—two nations whose rivalry is too often misunderstood or reduced to simplistic slogans.
Recent events have brought this decades-long conflict to a dangerous new peak. In October 2024, Iran launched missile strikes on Israeli cities from its own territory. Then, in June 2025, the two countries were engaged in their most sustained and intense military confrontations yet, with Israel striking deep into Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure in what it called Operation Rising Lion. Iran retaliated with missile and drone attacks against Israeli cities. This escalation is not “just another war in the Middle East.” It has profound ideological and geopolitical roots that matter deeply—not only for the region but also for global peace, including for South Africans who cherish democracy and pluralism.
A Historical Context: From Cooperation to Hostility
To understand today’s crisis, we need to go back to 1948, when Israel declared independence. At that time, Iran was ruled by Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, a secular monarch who offered Israel what amounted to de facto recognition. Despite pressure from Arab neighbours to avoid formal ties, Iran and Israel cooperated quietly in areas like oil trade and intelligence sharing throughout the 1950s, 60s, and 70s.
This fragile status quo ended abruptly in 1979. The Shah was overthrown in Iran’s Islamic Revolution, replaced by a theocratic regime led by Ayatollah Khomeini. This new government categorically rejected Israel’s right to exist, labelling it the “Little Satan” and embedding anti-Zionism into the very fabric of its ideology and constitution. This was not a response to specific Israeli policies but a foundational worldview. Iran’s leaders have since called for Israel’s destruction, a position reinforced by Khomeini’s successor, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who refers to Israel as a “cancerous tumour.”
Unlike many who oppose Israeli policies but accept its existence, Iran’s stance is absolute: Israel’s very existence is illegitimate. Meanwhile, Israel, though facing existential threats, has repeatedly demonstrated willingness to coexist, signing peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan and normalizing relations with several Arab states in recent years.
Iran’s Proxy Strategy: Weaponizing Resistance
Rather than waging direct war against Israel—which would be costly and risky—Iran has long used a strategy of proxy warfare. It mobilizes militant groups across the Middle East, funding, training, and arming them to attack Israel from multiple fronts.
Key proxies include Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen, and various Shi’ite militias in Syria and Iraq. These groups are not independent actors, but part of Iran’s broader regional network, designed to extend Tehran’s influence and challenge Israel indirectly.
Hezbollah today has an estimated 150,000 rockets and an extensive tunnel network capable of launching attacks deep into Israel’s northern communities. Hamas, heavily backed by Iran, controls Gaza and regularly fires rockets into Israeli civilian areas. These attacks are not for show—they cause real deaths and disruption.
Israel’s military responses to these threats deserve critical scrutiny, but it is important to recognise that they are overwhelmingly defensive, aimed at neutralizing attacks on Israeli civilians and infrastructure.
The Escalating Timeline
Here is a brief timeline that sheds light on how tensions have escalated over decades:
- 1948–1979: Under the Shah, Iran maintained covert cooperation with Israel. The 1979 revolution reversed this, with Khomeini institutionalizing hostility toward Israel.
- 1980s–1990s: Iran forms Hezbollah after Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, and funds Palestinian groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Iran’s nuclear programme begins drawing Israeli concern in the early 1990s.
- 2000–2010: Proxy wars intensify. Hezbollah launches thousands of rockets during the 2006 Lebanon War. Iran backs Hamas during Gaza conflicts, including Operation Cast Lead (2008–2009).
- 2010–2020: Israel reportedly disrupts Iran’s nuclear programme via cyberattacks (Stuxnet). Iran raises its Syrian military presence through Hezbollah and IRGC forces. The 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal temporarily eased tensions, but Israel opposed it vehemently. After the U.S. withdrew in 2018, Iran resumed nuclear enrichment, leading to Israeli airstrikes on Iranian assets in Syria.
- 2020–2023: Israel normalizes ties with several Arab states (Abraham Accords). Iran escalates proxy attacks with drones and missiles from Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. Israel conducts targeted assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists and IRGC operatives.
- October 2024: Iran launches over 150 missiles from its own territory into Israeli cities—its first direct strike on Israeli soil—causing civilian casualties despite Israel’s missile defences.
- June 2025: Israel launches Operation Rising Lion on June 12–13, targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, including the Natanz uranium enrichment site, and assassinating senior Iranian nuclear scientists and IRGC commanders. Iran retaliates on June 13–15 with missile and drone strikes on Israeli cities including Tel Aviv and Haifa, leading to civilian deaths and infrastructure damage. This marks the most intense direct military confrontation between the two since the Islamic Revolution.
Why Israel Launched Operation Rising Lion
Israel’s launch of Operation Rising Lion was directly triggered by alarming revelations in the IAEA’s May 2024 report, which outlined Iran’s rapidly advancing nuclear programme. The report confirmed that Iran had accumulated 142.1 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%—a level dangerously close to weapons-grade—and that its breakout time to produce a nuclear weapon had diminished to roughly one week. Furthermore, Iran had expanded its enrichment capabilities by installing advanced IR-6 centrifuges at facilities like Natanz, significantly increasing its uranium production capacity. These developments, combined with Iran’s restrictions on IAEA inspections—including the removal of key inspectors—raised serious concerns about Iran’s intentions and transparency. Taken together, these findings were perceived by Israeli defence officials as crossing a red line, prompting pre-emptive military action to prevent Iran from reaching nuclear weapon capability. Operation Rising Lion, therefore, marks the beginning of a new and more direct phase in the Israel-Iran conflict, rooted in what Israeli leadership viewed as an imminent existential threat.
A Clash of Ideologies
This is not a simple territorial dispute. It is a clash between fundamentally different systems. Israel, despite flaws, is a vibrant democracy with free elections, an independent judiciary, and civil liberties. It is home to diverse communities living under the rule of law.
Iran is a theocratic dictatorship that suppresses dissent, censors the press, persecutes minorities, and restricts women’s rights. Its aggression is rooted in ideological extremism and a revolutionary goal to eliminate Israel. Israel’s military actions, while sometimes forceful, are driven by survival logic. Iran’s actions are driven by ideology seeking dominance through destruction.
Despite facing persistent security challenges, Israel has consistently pursued peace with its neighbours. It signed landmark peace treaties with Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994, and Israeli leaders have engaged in complex, often painstaking negotiations with Palestinian representatives—from the Oslo Accords through Camp David to the Annapolis summit—demonstrating a genuine commitment to dialogue. More recently, the Abraham Accords (2020–2023) broke new ground by normalizing relations with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan, proving that regional cooperation is not only possible but achievable.
In stark contrast, Iran has walked away from nearly every diplomatic opportunity aimed at de-escalation or normalization. The 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA) initially offered hope, with Iran agreeing to limit uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. Yet Tehran soon violated key provisions by enriching uranium beyond agreed limits, obstructing international inspections, and advancing its missile programme. Between 2018 and 2024, negotiations in Vienna and elsewhere repeatedly collapsed, largely because Iran refused to address its support for militant proxies or curb its ballistic missile development. Even neutral mediators like Oman and Qatar were unable to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table. While the international community—including South Africa’s BRICS partners—continues to urge Iran toward diplomacy, Tehran’s posture remains one of defiance and regional expansionism rather than compromise.
Why This Conflict Matters to South Africans
Iran’s foreign policy is not reactive—it is expansionist and ideological. It seeks to export its revolutionary principles through proxies and direct military action, destabilizing the Middle East and threatening global peace.
For South Africans, this is more than distant geopolitics. It is about defending the principles we hold dear: democracy, pluralism, human rights, and the rule of law. The suffering of Palestinian civilians is real and must never be ignored or minimized. But it is critical to distinguish that suffering from Iran’s state-driven aggression.
Failing to make this distinction risks moral equivalency, treating victims and perpetrators alike, which ultimately hinders justice and peace. Moreover, Israel’s missile defence systems—Iron Dome, David’s Sling—have saved countless lives of Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike by intercepting thousands of rockets and drones.
Final Reflections
As a South African who believes in dialogue, diplomacy, and justice, I acknowledge peace is possible but not without honesty. Iran remains the primary aggressor through proxy wars and direct attacks. Recognizing this is not blind loyalty to Israel; it is an essential distinction between who ignites conflict and who fights for survival.
Peace in the Middle East will be long and difficult. But no real peace can begin without confronting these realities. Iran’s revolutionary project is the greatest threat to regional peace—and to the democratic, pluralistic values we all claim to uphold.
If South Africans can grasp the complexities behind the headlines, we can better understand how to support justice, human rights, and peace—both at home and globally. This is not just a Middle Eastern issue; it is a universal struggle between tyranny and democracy, aggression and survival, destruction and coexistence.
The views of the writer are not necessarily the views of the Daily Friend or the IRR.
If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend