Will Trump declare victory over Iran as he declared peace in Gaza? Will the Middle East be redrawn by force?

Today, the Middle East is not just witnessing a military escalation between Israel and Iran with American support, but is living a pivotal moment that could redraw the features of the region for decades to come. What is happening far exceeds the title of "Iran's nuclear program" which is presented as the core of the crisis. In essence, we are facing a struggle over who has the ability to shape the new regional order, and to define the rules of security and politics that will organize the balances of the Middle East in the next phase.The joint American-Israeli strikes against Iran in 2026 are not a fleeting military event, but an indicator of the conflict's transition from proxy wars to direct confrontation, and from conflict management to an attempt to reshape it. In this context, Israel is no longer merely a regional actor moving within existing balances, but has become part of a military-strategic alliance led by the United States to re-engineer the regional order.Understanding this transformation requires looking at the American interior as well. The failure of the Senate resolution to restrict President Donald Trump's powers in using military force against Iran reflects the continued granting by the American political establishment to the president a wide margin for military action in the Middle East, despite the escalating internal debate about the cost of wars. Here the paradox of the "America First" (MAGA) current emerges. This current raises the slogan of reducing foreign wars and protecting the American economy from the burdens of long conflicts, but at the same time supports strong deterrence policies in the Middle East, especially towards Iran, under the title of protecting allies and enhancing national security. This contradiction reflects a struggle within the conservative current between an isolationist tendency that rejects costly wars, and a security tendency that sees military force as a tool to protect American interests even beyond borders.In this context, the concept of the "New Middle East" is changing. It is no longer an economic or diplomatic project as previously proposed, but has become a security project par excellence. The reordering of borders is no longer merely geographical, but political and functional, based on the redistribution of influence and the creation of security systems led by Israel with American support. The Israeli ambition goes beyond normalization towards strategically subjugating the regional environment, so that any party rejecting this system becomes outside the equation of regional legitimacy.This transformation is linked to the development of the Zionist project itself. From a colonial settlement project in "Judea and Samaria," to a geopolitical influence project across borders. The idea of "Greater Israel" no longer means direct geographical annexation only, but security and economic hegemony that makes Israel the center of regional decision-making without the need to officially change maps. Control here is functional: permanent military superiority, control over security paths, and regional integration conditioned on accepting this superiority. Within this equation, the doctrine of "permanent war" emerges. Constant tension justifies the militarization of Israeli society, settlement expansion, and the obstruction of any political solution to the Palestinian issue. True peace may end the justifications for military superiority, while the continuation of the threat reproduces the legitimacy of force. Here interests converge: Israel needs a turbulent regional environment to justify its superiority, and some decision-making circles in Washington see this as a means to enhance deterrence without being drawn into long occupations as happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.The Palestinian issue is not a marginal detail in the process of reshaping the Middle East, but represents the central obstacle to establishing the new regional order. Therefore, Palestinian geography is being dismantled, institutions weakened, and the conflict transformed from a national liberation issue into a humanitarian-relief file, in an attempt to strip it of its political and legal dimension and turn it into merely a matter of managing populations, not a matter of right and sovereignty. What we are witnessing today is not just a war on Iran, but a moment of comprehensive reformulation of the region where the strategy of Israeli superiority intersects with the "America First" debate within Washington. The Middle East is being redrawn by force, and religious narratives are being invoked to justify policies of hegemony and entrench Israel's long-term superiority.The Middle East is being redrawn by force and theology that employs politics to achieve Israel's greater goals.Trump may come out and declare victory at any moment, just as he declared peace in Gaza regardless of the reality, but the real question is no longer who will declare victory, but what kind of Middle East will emerge from this historical moment: a Middle East governed by the equation of power and permanent deterrence, or a new regional order that restores consideration to diplomacy, international law, and the principles of justice? The way this phase ends will not only determine the balance of power, but will also determine the form of peace – or the continuation of conflict – in the Middle East.