On Feb. 5, London’s inimitable [The Economist magazine opined (https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2026/02/05/two-countries-have-changed-their-position-about-war-with-iran) on the recent ins and outs of the potential for diplomacy or war in the Middle East over Iran. The almost-rambling story focused on their view of the doings of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran, with some Trump administration thrown in. It did remind us that in his interview with The Economist earlier in January, Bibi Netanyahu had cautioned against military strikes against Iran, arguing that “revolutions are best done from within.” That having not worked out as hoped, Bibi’s view has now changed, as The Economist acknowledges. Otherwise, few of their details matter.
Not so the article’s conclusion, which reveals the intent:
“Alliances are shifting. In the aftermath of its military victories, Israel saw itself as the regional hegemon. Today Iran looks weaker than ever. Competition for influence is growing. A regional war would unleash chaos, but it would also create new opportunities.”
