Episode 243: The current escalation of the war in the Middle East with Joseph Daher

Coordinated and Produced by Elisa Garbil

Dive into the current crisis in Iran with Joseph Daher! Dominic and Joseph discuss the US and Israel’s strategic operations, Iran’s response and regional implications these might have, the global consequences and international reactions, the potential for an outright regional war, the nuclear ambitions of Iran, regional security and the growing insecurity, the role of global powers and more!

Joseph Daher is a Swiss-Syrian academic and activist. He currently teaches at the University of Lausanne (Switzerland), and at the University of Ghent (Belgium) and has been an affiliated professor at the European University Institute (EUI). He has worked with the EUI on the conflict in Syria and the aftermath of the war. Herewith Joseph has published multiple papers, which aimed to produce quality, strategic and accurate reports and analysis of wartime perspectives, challenges, trends and policy options in anticipation of post-conflict stabilisation in Syria.

Moreover, Joseph is an expert on Syria, Lebanon, and the Middle East, and has worked for various UN Agencies, NGO’s and research centers in consulting and expert mandates to conduct programs, trainings, and research for them. He is the author of three books: Hezbollah: The Political Economy of Lebanon’s Party of God, Syria After the Uprising: The Political Economy of State Resilience and Palestine and Marxism . Finally, he is the founder of the blog Syria Freedom Forever. He is also co-founder of the Alliance of Middle Eastern and North African Socialists.

The International Risk Podcast is a must-listen for senior executives, board members, and risk advisors. This weekly podcast dives deep into international relations, emerging risks, and strategic opportunities. Hosted by Dominic Bowen, Head of Strategic Advisory at one of Europe’s top risk consulting firms, the podcast brings together global experts to share insights and actionable strategies.

Dominic’s 20+ years of experience managing complex operations in high-risk environments, combined with his role as a public speaker and university lecturer, make him uniquely positioned to guide these conversations. From conflict zones to corporate boardrooms, he explores the risks shaping our world and how organisations can navigate them.

The International Risk Podcast – Reducing risk by increasing knowledge.

Follow us on LinkedIn  and Instagram for all our great updates.

Subscribe to our newsletter for weekly briefs.

Tell us what you liked!

Transcript:

Elisa Garbil: Welcome back to the International Risk Podcast, where we discuss the latest world news and significant events that impact businesses and organizations worldwide.

Dominic Bowen: I’m Dominic Bowen, host of the International Risk Podcast. Today, Iran is at its most dangerous national security situation that it is faced in decades and it’s simultaneously under attack from Israel and the United States with real risk of a wider regional war. The international risks couldn’t be more significant, and just yesterday at least 22 people were killed, and nearly 63 others were wounded in a suicide bomb attack at a church in Damascus.

And at the same time, Israel continues to expand its control of territory deep into Syria in building up to a 60 kilometer sphere of influence. The risks in the region are significant, and this is on top of ongoing attacks in Palestinian territory, and I. In Lebanon, the Israeli attacks on Iranian sovereignty have been significant.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards headquarters have been attacked. Prisons used for political distance have been attacked and including many facilities including universities. There’s been explosions across. The country, including in Tehran and Israel, is clearly using this moment to decapitate hardline control structures within Iran and simultaneously cripple command and control networks.

We’ve heard by now the US strategic bombing campaign called Operation Midnight Hammer. Where the US struck three of Iran’s most fortified nuclear sites, they use B two bombers, Tomahawk cruise missiles. 14, massive ordinance Penetrators, bunker Busters, and Iran confirms that damage has occurred, but denies that there’s been any nuclear material leaks.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that there is structural damage, but no radiological contamination yet the US is positioning a strike as a preventative non-proliferation action. Not regime change, but the things we’re hearing from Donald Trump, the president of the United States suggests otherwise, I.

There’s many things we’d like to unpack on the podcast today, and we’re joined by our friend and repeat guest, Joseph Daher. He’s a Swiss Syrian academic and an activist. He currently teaches at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland. He’s an expert on the Middle East. He’s worked for various UN agencies, NGOs.

He’s the author of three books about Hezbollah, Syria, and Palestine, and he is the co-founder of a Middle East and North African Alliance. He’s been on the podcast several times and we welcome him back today to discuss the current situation in Iran and broadly across the Middle East. Joseph, welcome back to the International WI Podcast.

Joseph Daher: Thank you, Dominic. it’s a pleasure to. It’s a pleasure to be here.

Dominic Bowen: Joseph the situation is clearly very serious right across the Middle East. Whether we look at Lebanon, whether we look at Palestine, Syria Israel. Iran has responded with dozens of missile and drone strikes into Israeli territory. Since the attacks began there’s been air raid sirens triggering across Israel and Tel Aviv, Jerusalem Beersheba, and even Haifa.

And. Iran has also signaled that it may attack US bases in Iraq, in KU aid, in Bahrain, and even in Qatar. Iran is potentially mobilizing assets that it still controls or influences in Syria and in Yemen. And there is the concern about this wider strategic positioning. Can you tell us, what do you know, Joseph? What should we be paying attention to today?

Joseph Daher: Yes, Dominic, your question is really important because I think the consequences are not limited or restricted to the region of the Middle East and North Africa, but have global consequences. For example the issue that in reaction to the latest us bombing of Iran, the Iranian Parliament has already voted.

In favor of possibly, potentially closing the most Detroit. This needs to be confirmed at the executive power. But this would mean the closing of a Detroit, that through which one third of international trade goes through, especially when it comes to oil resources and would.

You know, fueled energy oil resources throughout the world, from Europe, the us et cetera. So we can see the global consequences. Moreover, the issue of Iran and nuclear proliferation agreement. Also, Iran could take as a step in reaction to the latest US and Israeli attacks. A decision to withdraw from the treaty as, despite, you know, negotiating for years the latest US attacks shows that for many countries, and not only Iran and what is called, generally speaking, the global itself actually it doesn’t lead to anything. So it also has consequences more generally on how people and official perceive international law, because it’s important to say that has been.

Now, for decades, but in the more recent political contemporary period since the seventh of October violating any kind of potential framework for international law when it comes to the Palestinians, but also you were mentioning it, further occupation. Lebanese territories and not actually respecting the ceasefire that was concluded at the end of November and still bombing nearly on a daily basis, Lebanon, but expanding also its occupation of Syria and also bombing, Yemen.

And now it’s the turn of Iran. The claim that it is acting in self-defense, which it’s a rhetoric that has been also taken by its main allies in Western states such as Europe and the us. But marginally speaking, I think also the latest strikes of the US against Iran confirmed that actually this recent war is.

LED and ordered by the us Israel would never have been able to act whether simply talking about the potential green light given to Tel Aviv. In technological perspective, information wise, infrastructures, it was really a US led mission. And what is clear is that the US with its main ally in the region, Israel wants to consolidate.

Its against an actor that we can, you know, I personally don’t. Have in my heart the Islamic Republic of Iran. I think it’s a authoritarian, reactionary regime. But acting this way, violating international law, human rights, et cetera, is not serving. Especially the population of Iran. On the opposite the Islamic Republic of Iran will deepen and most probably increase its repression against the courageous, Iranian Democrats progresses, feminist, et cetera.

But it’s really I think what we witnessing a willingness of the US to reach a total.

Offensive and wars, and this is therefore a continuation. What we witnessed says the 7th of October. So this is just to put the,

Dominic Bowen: and you mentioned that the strata I understand that Iran’s Parliament has passed an emergency resolution pre authorizing the closure of the Strai Ho, which as you said, 20% of global oil flows.

And we know that Iranian naval units have begun mobilizing the Abound abust to close the Strats. And there’s satellite imagery confirming that troop and missile launch movements are occurring in the area. We also know that Tehran is calling on proxy forces like Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen.

Paramilitary force units in Iraq to begin preparing coordinated attacks on both Israeli and US targets. Across the region. We know the price of Brent Crude has now gone up about 6% just in the last 24 hours. US stock markets are very jittery. Europe and China are calling for emergency sessions in the UN Security Council.

We know that both Ireland, France, Germany, and many other countries have evacuated the diplomatic personnel from both Iran. And Israel and many analysts are talking about a regional war. But I wonder, Joseph, are we already in a regional war? And if we are, and even if we aren’t, what are the next red lines that we should be watching out for?

What are the red lines that Israel, Iran, or the US are likely to cross next?

Joseph Daher: Dominic, again, a very good question because every time I feel I have to answer this kind of question. We exceed the former red line. Where is the red line now? A few occasion we said, the bombing of nuclear sites in Iran would be a red line.

It is not anymore. Every day that passes in the Gaza Strip, we say it’s a red line. Again being overstepped. So we are defacto in a former regional war since especially the aftermath of the seventh October. I mean, this Israeli. War against the Palestinians did not stop at the historic borders.

What mean territories of Palestine? It’s extended to Lebanon, Syria, we mentioned it to Yemen even with us strikes in Iraq as well. I don’t believe the US are specifically seeking regime change in Iran because this would need boots on the ground, but they’re definitely seeking, to not put an end, but maybe to undermine significantly the nuclear process within Iran? Definitely, and again to impose. I think that the key issue is about the necessity to impose hegemony through war, which has been ongoing. For the past two years. At the same time, we shouldn’t forget that this was happening at a period where criticism and even measures taken by European states especially were increasing against the state of Israel, especially regarding ministers that are involved directly in the expansion of Israeli settlements, which I remind is against international law.

Similarly, there was increasing, criticism from sections of the opposition in Israel. A week before Israel launching this war against Iran, there was a vote Parliament to basically put an end to this Israeli Netanyahu LED government that was rejected. And now under the, if you want to watch Word of the Sacred Union, against the threat of Iran is a surge of popularity you were mentioning at the beginning of your question, the potential closure of the or moves Detroit. And here Iran is also facing some challenges because at the same time, it entered for the past two years, a formal normalization process with the Gulf States.

And this would affect also its relation with the Gulf regimes, the Gulf monarchies as blocking the almost Detroit would not be in their interest. Similarly when it comes to its relationship to Iran, even though China is much more dependent on Gulf monarchies, it’s still important 10% of its oil resources from Iran. So closing this Detroit would also have potential negative consequences on, its allies. And the second thing you mentioned, it’s the regional networks of Iran allies, it has, I think Iran is in a very much weaker position than it was two years before to mobilize this kind of network.

Hezbollah despite threats has not moved. And there’s great pressure within Lebanon to push Hezbollah, not to act. Syria is actually the new government is the only. I think regional country to not have condemned Israel and us latest war against Iran. They see very much they have very much hostility towards Iran, not only because of the role of Iran during the Syrian uprising supporting, the asset regime, the former dictatorship, but because they want to root the country in a.

US led access with potential future normalization with Israel. Lastly, in Iraq the network of and where you have more very important presence of allies of Iran. They have made threats, but also they have very much a lot of pressure from the BARDA government to prevent any actions against US military basis.

Finally, you do have Yemen where the Houthis are still, I would say. In the best position to act, but even the action would be limited. So here you have also a caty of Iranian allies that is much weaker than two years ago. So options of Iran are to say the least limited because of this war. this is something to take into account.

Dominic Bowen: Yeah, it’s very interesting and President Trump said that he had totally obliterated the atomic program in Iran. And one thing was still missing though. And that’s the highly enriched uranium, which international authorities haven’t seen for more than a week. Whilst the US attacks clearly have set back Iran’s nuclear ambition and dealt the regime in Iran, clearly humiliating and a devastating blow.

The nuclear program hasn’t been completely destroyed, and we’ll come to that in a minute. But I am concerned, and I think many people are concerned that the US attack may ultimately lead to Tehran to actually end any international monitoring of its nuclear program and actually push forward even faster to develop a nuclear bomb.

We know that many of the leaders in Tehran haven’t been seen in several days, and even as diplomatic allies to Iran, including Russia and China have largely stayed on the sidelines. We know that Iran’s network of proxies across the region, they’re weakened, but they’re still operating, and there are still ways that Tehran can inflict pain on the US and the broader international community.

For the moment, it looks like. both Trump and Khomeini may be working to avoid escalation, but I wonder from what you’ve seen and from what you’ve studied and people you are speaking to, what are the options that Iran has for next steps?

Joseph Daher: As I was mentioning before, I think the ability for Iran to react quite limited. I was mentioning regarding the homeless Detroit and its allies when it comes to the Gulf monarchies China and Russia have been quite, despite rhetorically condemning us. Israeli attacks will not play any role in protection of Iran.

Military Russia is still very much involved. And also a deal with and China probably try to politically and economically benefit from the instability in the Middle East to present itself, as a more neutral actor towards all actors, including Israel, Iran, the Middle East, in contrast to being much more, allied with the us and its allies.

Now what I feel is important to transmit as a mission is a large feeling in Iran that despite the hostility, people for a large section of the population have against this regime of the mollah and the constant repression and deepening repression against, various protest movement. And the last one being, the freedom movement around women’s liberation emancipation large section of the same population also oppose this war on Iran and actually plays in their opposite to the interests. Again, because we have not seen throughout history, I would say over the past several decades, liberation of a population after US bomb being a partica country or Israel.

I think here again, the example of Iraq, 2003 is quite important in many ways. The war that was led by the US and Great Britain was based on a lie. Back then Sadan Hussein regime had, chemical weapons that could be used against Western interest. And therefore we had to get rid of this regime. And again this regime was very violent, authoritarian. And especially against its own population this war brought even more cows to the religion pain to the Iraqi population that is still living the consequences of this invasion, occupation, destruction of infrastructures, and that give basically birth to something that is worse than eda Islamic State here in Iran.

It’s important to have a look in history. Not that history always repeats itself, but this new war against Iran was mostly based on a lie because if you check newspapers and international presence to basically the nineties, they’re announcing that in two or three years, Iran will have the nuclear bump.

Here again, according to many information, whether even including US officials From the international organization saying Iran was not close to a bomb and this war was still launched. I think what is needed is to see the only negative aspects of this latest war, whether for the union people, whether for the region and more generally in disrespect of international law that has been obviously accelerating since the beginning of the 20th century.

Russian invasion, Iran is an example, but prior to this you had the US British led invasion, and this creates, a particular dynamic. So I think all these aspects are important to take into consideration.

Dominic Bowen: Yeah, they’re all very important. And you’re totally right.

Joseph. Israeli leaders, including Netanyahu, have been saying since the 1990s that Iran was about to acquire a nuclear weapon. The US should bomb Iranian assets. So this is something that Netanyahu has been pushing for over two decades. Nevertheless, the international inspectors from the International Atomic Agency said that they don’t know where about 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium that Iran has already produced is actually located today. The seals were broke a couple of weeks ago. It’s believed that these items have been moved to an unknown location and the fact that there’s been no radioactive release from the sites that the US strike on Sunday means that potentially enrich materials were not hit.

Now tehran’s nuclear ambitions, this has been a essential priority for the country for, again, about two. I suspect that this has only been reinforced by the events over the last 10 days, potentially planting the seeds for future conflict, which of course we’re all trying to avoid. now that two nuclear powers, Israel and America, have attacked a non-nuclear power in order to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

N noting that security guarantees have proven useless. As you mentioned, see Ukraine where security guarantees provided to Ukraine in the 1990s when Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons, proved completely useless. Do you think that Iran is likely to pursue its ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons in secret in order to prevent this sort of attack occurring again in future?

Joseph Daher: I cannot be, I have a potentially are open for the future and the next following days will be very important when it comes to the process of decision at the top of the Islamic Republic of Iran. But I think the key message here, and I think you partially answered your own question, is that most of the states in the world we’ll look at the latest event by saying, we need to get the nuclear weapon as soon as possible in order to be able to negotiate. And if we look at, Northern Korea, this was the policy that was followed. When you have the capacity to use the nuclear.

Bomb. You have a better position to negotiate. And many, maybe, most probably in the Iranian leadership are saying, unfortunately, we cannot get this nuclear weapon as soon as possible. This would not have prevented this kind of actions. So I think this is a possibility that part of the Iranian leadership will.

As a result of the latest action by the US and Israel, take the decision to withdraw from the international agreement regarding proliferation and accelerate the process to have this nuclear weapon as the best way to defend itself. This could be, I believe definitely a choice by certain section the leadership.

Moreover, I think it’s important to say that despite, the targeting of nuclear sites, you still have thousands of, chemists, scientists in Iran that have this experience, that have accumulated this experience of potentially reaching the level to create a nuclear bomb. And this has not been destroyed.

So it’s not only about sites, obviously this plays a role, but it’s also about the scientific accumulation process that had been ongoing for the past, several decades in Iran. Can be certain, but I think definitely this could be an option for the union leadership, definitely as a lesson learned.

Dominic Bowen: And when we talk about the leadership in Iran, I understand that the leadership has used the recent attacks by Israel as a powerful tool to temporarily unify hardline factions and rally broader support throughout the Iranian society. Now, despite Iran’s severe economic crisis longstanding elite fractures, and of course the dramatic and widespread attacks by Israel over the last couple of weeks. To what extent are you seeing, and are you hearing about how Iran is using this conflict to unify hardline factions? And do you think this is likely to lead to regime change or actually lead to an even more solidified position by the atoll and his followers?

Joseph Daher: I think you’re right to say that it’ll solidify section of the Islamic Republic of Iran leadership for sure. Especially when it comes to the most extremist wings, or I would say the most radical to be more precise lesser eager to have any kind of deal with the us.

More generally, but also the level of infiltration that we witnessed in Iran because a lot of the leadership of scientists that were targeted out there in their own houses. So it. It shows you had high infiltration of US and Israeli spies or information within the highest level of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

So does that mean is it only infiltration or that you do have section maybe of the Iranian section of the ruling clause. That is also saying, this regime is pushing us towards a potential downfall. And we would be ready to have a deal with the US and Israel if we could maintain, section of the regime.

And this is an open question because talking with some specialists, it’s also an option an orientation that would maintain, the key structures of the regime, but get rid of the section of the leadership that is hostile to any kind of deal with the us in Israel.

So potentially it can unify section of the leadership, but it’ll also potential divisions as well as, it is perceived quite rightly the past two years as a total failure of Iranian policy. And it’s also foreign policy. So here again, I think it’s an open question. What is definitely sure is that the ability of the Islamic Republic of Iran to unify the population is not a tool on the table.

Why large section of the population oppose this war? It does not see at all the Republic of Iran and its leadership as something positive. Or that can be redeemed, definitely not. moreover, when it comes to regions that are majority inhabited by the Kurds or the Balu that suffer harsh repression.

Dominic Bowen: And what are the impacts for security and international risk across the region? Of course, we’ve got the Gulf States, especially Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who are really walking a tightrope between the Trump administration, security guarantees and economic cooperation.

But even as we discussed earlier, with Israel taking on massive swaths of Syrian territory while everyone is looking in the other direction, and then ongoing conflict in Lebanon. Yemen and in Palestine, how do you see the current attacks in Iran shaping security across the region?

Joseph Daher: Yeah, so a major difference, Dominic, I think we have to take into account is the normalization that occurred two years ago now between Saudi Arabia and Iran under the auspices of China, because prior to this, Iran would’ve probably.

Used this opportunity of, I mean, Israel and US War against Tehran to target US military basis in Gulf States. This is much less the case today because of this normalization. It’s much less the case and the ability to act in territories because this would signify, creating forms of divisions and even hostilities between these states and Iran which I don’t believe the union leadership wants to see right now.

So even though, there are red flags when it comes to US military base in Bahrain, Kuwait Saudi Arabia, Qatar, most of these countries have tried in the past few years to find some forms of understanding if not normalization with Iran and no one has an interest in the fall of the regime in Iran and creating more cows in this region.

And this is also, this is also why you understand that all of these statements generally did not see in a good eye or even and condemn Israeli aggression against Iran. That could create more instability, especially when you look at Saudi Arabia’s political economy in which one of the key principle is stability in the region.

And this is on the opposite, creating a stability. Especially when you look at the tourism industry welcoming big international events. What is happening is not creating a lot of eagerness to go to Saudi Arabia. What on the opposite. this is one thing to take into consideration to security.

Coming back to your question about the security issue. The basic of us, orientation. True war, we will be peace by basically saying by putting an end to any kind of actor, challenging our own political interest or policy orientation, we will create peace.

But at what price and until when, and I don’t think this will be quite successful. Definitely they could reach concessions from the reunion leadership. But what kind of. This, I think is not security based, not only a perspective of security that is limited to stability, but when it comes to democracy, social justice, which are the key pillars to build, security on a middle and, all the consideration to take into account is that Israel’s own actions in the region is creating instability. Not only against the Palestinians, as I was saying, but in the neighboring regions we’ve seen, for example, a lot of Lebanese business actors are very much afraid that all the current war led by Israel and us against Iran will have negative consequences on the summer and tourist industry, which is a key pillar of Lebanese economy. So we can see here that it creates more instability.

Moreover the fact of. Violation of human rights in Palestine, but throughout the region is also creating instability in the neighboring countries as population mobilized sometimes to denounce the action of Israel, but also to denounce their own states that are, or collaborating directly or indirectly with the states of Israel.

All this is rather quite negative when it comes to the security of the region.

Dominic Bowen: And right now, Joseph, Russia and China appear very content to just watch the US become again entangled in conflict in the Middle East. And this is potentially distracting Washington from strategic competition elsewhere.

From supporting Russia’s illegal invasion in Ukraine from a potential invasion or influence of China Over Taiwan. Now Russian President Putin and Chinese President Xi have publicly condemned Israel attacks. They’ve labeled them as violations of international law, and this is probably correct, it probably is a violation of international law and they’ve urged all parties, especially Israel, to hold facilities to prevent wider regional fallout.

But I wonder from what you are seeing, Joseph, and based on your analysis, what is the role of Russia and China in this current situation?

Joseph Daher: Russia and China are definitely close allies of Iran. And lately Russia and Iran, I think it was last year or beginning of this year, concluded. An agreement covering wide dynamics from security, policy, economy, et cetera.

But in this agreement, there was no clear article saying in case one of the two countries is attacked, other has to react. Russia has as you were saying, denounced just as China the actions of Israel. But at the same time, Russian President Putin said he could play an role.

Between the two actors because we shouldn’t forget that. Russian President Putin had very good relationship with Netanyahu and the Israeli government in general, and actually the relation worsened increasingly following the ion of Russian war against Ukraine in 2002.

Condemned quite, outspokenly Russian invasion, but as Russian isolation was increasing on an international political scene, and Iran and Russia’s relationship was witnessing, a RAB promo Iran was in providing. The drones that were used by Russia, or sections of the drones that were used by Russia to attack the Ukrainian.

And this was a worry, a disclosing closer relationship between Russia and Iran to Israel. it created a bit of tensions, but I think Russian president. Putin could see an opportunity to have a reman with Israel through this issue and will not enter into a significant conflict with Tel Aviv.

For the interest of Iran this is quite sure, and plus Russia is expecting with the new presidency in the US to. Partially break its legislation, make also on Ukraine. So these are consideration to take into account I believe so. I don’t believe Russian will, have a more important role.

In preventing Israeli and US attacks, plus military is very hard for it, plus for the other political reasons I mentioned. When it comes to China, China has definitely not seen this a positive eye as I was saying before, 10% of its oil re input comes from Iran and it could create instability.

And the diffusion of fuel oil to China without forgetting that China imports, I think at least half of its fuel import from the Middle East. So this is, stability is obviously not positive to it. But again, I don’t think China will overstep its road. It knows it has limited in the east.

To have a growing role. Iran is also important, and this also doesn’t want to see, for locales in its expansion policy when it comes to its policy to invest infrastructures trade roads or the Silk Road, et cetera. But at the same time it could use this of what we’re witnessing increasing, Concentration of US military capacities in the Middle East and less in the Pacific, which has been, if you remember, Dominic since Barack Obama mandate actually the Washington wanted a policy orientation and has continued whether Democrats or Republican. The biggest rival today is China.

And therefore increasing its military capacities in the Pacific oceans or in Southeast Asia. So China also is viewing disparate as they’re concentrating their forces in this region of the Middle East, and they could benefit with increasing their own interests in Southeast Asia.

Neighboring countries, but also putting potentially more pressure on Taiwan. So we have to take into consideration these various interests of China. And finally lifted last argument. China has limited option when it comes to the military field. You cannot compete with us military capacities today.

I think China is one or two. The US is 17 and this is a major difference in ability to act throughout the world.

Dominic Bowen: When we talk about capabilities, we know that Iran’s cyber attack capabilities are very significant and they’ve become a central pillar of Iran’s asymmetric warfare strategy. And over the past decade, Iran’s developed a really robust cyber apparatus under the supervision of both its military and its intelligence agencies, and its now considered one of the most active players in the international cyber arena.

Now Iran in the last couple of days has threatened cyber attacks. It’s threatened proxy activation across the region, as well as the disruption of energy flows that we’ve talked about. So when we consider these asymmetric threats that Iran poses, what do you think is the greatest risk to global stability?

And what should business leaders and politicians be preparing for?

Joseph Daher: So I’m not a specialist on cyber attacks. I know it’s been increasingly used By Iran. And it’s also a kind of tool of the week in many ways to try to create instability to try to send messages, to try to hearing informations.

But here again, if you compare the level of technologies from the Israeli. Military technologies, capacities Israeli tech that is well known throughout the world with the assistance of the us also well known for these kind of technologies. Iran cannot compete again, and I think whether you had most probably a network of spies of the US and Israel within Iran, you do have also IT technologies and networks very much advanced.

And again, I don’t believe teran, despite its growing investment in this field, can compete on this aspect. And actually since. Many ways since the seventh October, we’ve seen the vast and deep not only military ity, but in terms of technology ity of Israel in comparison to, to its neighbors and including today Iran.

Dominic Bowen: And for the last week at least, I’ve been working with a lot of clients to look at some of the most significant risks, including the risks of proxy escalation and what that means for clients and businesses with operations across the Middle East. This could be attacks byhumanitarian crisis, the impacts, workflows, and access to certain countries.

We’ve got certainly energy market shocks disruptions to oil and gas flows. There’s the risk of global inflation. Picking up we’ve already seen some supply chain breakdowns. There’s of course the macro level risk of nuclear proliferation, but there’s also risks around physical attacks and terrorism, and then of course diplomatic paralysis and this breakdown of any country’s ability to mediate a deescalation of the current crisis.

But what’s the one risk that you think governments and global business leaders are underestimating in this current conflict?

Joseph Daher: You already did a long list, I believe, of potential risks. If I had to add any additional risks to take into account is the it’s really the potential reactions of the population of the region, even though, large extent the population have.

Let’s say a negative outlook or the role of the Islamic Republican of Iran in the region because of its policies, interventions, whether regarding Iraq Syria, Lebanon but also despite this, the fact that it is very much understood as a continuation of all. The violation of human rights since seven October is creating more instability at the level of the population in this region of more protest movement, of more frustration towards, ruling elites that do not take into consideration in sufficient ways the interest and opinion.

Population and therefore again, creating more instability. We often see, and I think this is one of the main shortcomings when comes to policy. And other analysis is to see security only from perspective from above. Meaning, reinforcing the army, the security services, military equipment, et cetera, which is part of it.

Definitely we cannot deny that this plays a road, but actually real security is only based if you see it, I believe. In a perspective from below in which we have to take into account, democratic rights, but also socioeconomic rights. The Middle East and North African region is most probably the most impoverished or the second most impoverished region in the world with the highest socioeconomic inequalities instability and insecurity even for, business actors investments. Plus it’s also connected to the political economy of the region. That is mostly focused, on the dynamic centered on trade finance. High real estate project tourism but for high incoming population and no incentives to develop productive sectors of the economy.

And despite all the incentives, created by the states of the region to encourage foreign direct investment again foreign investment in the region is one of the lowest in the world. Maybe, only Sub-Saharan Africa is worse than the Middle East of and North Africa. So this tells you also about the shortcomings and the limitation of this vision.

And this is, I don’t believe fault enough in how do we perceive security? How do we perceive it connected from a perspective from below, but also regarding the political economy. Of the region. And finally, definitely I think the complete impunity provided and given to Israel doesn’t have only consequences in the middle of North Africa, but we’re witnessing it as well in Europe and North America with increased, attacks on democratic rights freedom of expression, ability to criticize, basic foreign policies, internal policies, which endangers in creating instability. So again, I think there are various, dynamics to your question in my answer. But I think all have to be taken into account and that we shouldn’t believe that what is happening over there will not have consequences on our own regions.

Dominic Bowen: I think that’s a really valid point, Joseph, and I appreciate you bringing that up and I appreciate you coming on the International Risk Podcast today.

Joseph Daher: Thank you do for inviting me again and for the opportunity to exchange with you.

Dominic Bowen: That was a really great conversation with Joseph Dayer. He’s a Swiss Syrian academic and an activist.

I really appreciated hearing his thoughts on the latest events in the Middle East and the international risks emerging from the current Israel, Iran, US conflict. Please remember to go to our website and subscribe to our mail list to ensure that you get the biweekly newsletter in your inbox to see the latest news podcast and articles in your email inbox every second week.

Today’s podcast was produced and coordinated by Elisa Garbil. I’m Dominic Bowen, your host. Thanks very much for listening, and we’ll speak again next week.