What Iran has witnessed in recent days was not merely a series of internal disturbances or sporadic protests; rather, it can be viewed as an extension of a broader confrontation that had already manifested itself in what became known as the “Twelve-Day War” waged by the Zionist entity and the United States against Iran. In this context, the overt and covert interventions by Washington and Tel Aviv - through political, media, and psychological support for saboteurs - formed yet another link in the same chain of pressure and confrontation, aimed at weakening the Islamic Republic of Iran and reshaping the regional balance of power in favor of Tel Aviv and Washington. Following the failure of direct military strategies, the tools of soft and hybrid warfare have come to the fore more clearly. Official statements by US and Israeli officials, along with interventionist messages and tweets circulated on social media, have plainly shown that these external actors viewed Iran’s internal unrest as an opportunity to advance their own agendas. Verbal support for “change” in Iran, incitement to escalate protests, and attempts to legitimize violent rioting all indicate that the arena of conflict has shifted from the military battlefield to the realm of public opinion and internal stability. Within this framework, social media has become the primary battlefield of narratives. Through targeted rhetoric, tweets and messages issued by officials and institutions linked to the United States and the Zionist entity seek to portray these disturbances as a “popular uprising,” while simultaneously concealing the role of external factors. This media intervention was not driven by concern for the Iranian people, but rather formed part of a strategy of maximum pressure and the draining of the country’s internal capacities. What the West seeks is an Iran subservient to the Zionist entity, operating within the orbit of its interests. A review of Iran’s contemporary history shows that the notion of replacing the Islamic Republic with a system aligned with Israel is not merely an abstract scenario; it was previously tested during the era of the Shah. At that time, the Pahlavi regime was among Israel’s closest regional allies. Extensive security, intelligence, and economic relations were established between Tehran and Tel Aviv - from direct cooperation between SAVAK and Mossad, to supplying Israel with oil, to Iran’s role as a central pillar in Israel’s “peripheral” strategy to encircle the Arab world. The outcome of this alliance was not enhanced regional security, but rather deeper mistrust, widened regional divides, and the strengthening of Israel’s influence at the heart of the Middle East - weakening the position of Arab states and increasing pressure on the Palestinian cause. A return to a model resembling the Pahlavi era would mean reviving an imbalanced system that places Israel’s interests at the center while marginalizing collective regional security; such a system serves neither Iran nor the Gulf Cooperation Council states. Past experiences have demonstrated that the policy of “divide and rule” has always been one of the primary tools employed by the United States and Israel in the region. Under current conditions, the resilience of each state in isolation is costly and fragile. The only effective path to confronting mounting pressures lies in building genuine regional rapprochement, based on shared interests, respect for national sovereignty and rejection of external interference. Day thirteen symbolizes a new phase of the same war that began earlier using different instruments - a war that does not target Iran alone, but the region as a whole. Today, it is clearer than ever that internal destabilization constitutes part of a larger project to reshape regional equations. Historical experience has shown that strengthening dialogue, rapprochement, and regional cooperation represents the most effective course for safeguarding national interests, preserving political independence, and establishing sustainable stability and security for the peoples of the region. Such an approach can also play a decisive role in reducing tensions and managing shared challenges. www.kuwaittimes.com/article/38697