The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 9 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
The Iran‐Israel Conflict: An Ultra‐Ideological Explanation
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Iran's enmity with Israel is ideological in the first place and strategic in the second. Iran intends through anti‐Israel actions and messaging to internally mobilize its populace and, externally, to claim the leadership of the Muslim world and strike a balance against a regional nuclear power. This article uses a critique based on constructivism and realism to reveal how Iran's confrontation with Israel has evolved historically from “identity‐ideological” to “politico‐strategic.” I argue that Iran's adoption of this approach without taking its internal and external capacities into consideration has ironically bolstered the Israeli far right, increased global sympathies for Israel, escalated Iranophobia, aligned conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine. To preserve its national interests and regional security, Iran needs to overcome this politico‐historical stage and replace conflict with competition.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
26 Own interpretation · 16 No basis given · 6 Sources not found · 2 Not checked yet · 1 No full text of the sources
In the paper
“Iran's approach has resulted in Israel's security and stability.53”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Internal Dissatisfaction, External Marginalization
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [53]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Externally, the state projects an image of itself as deserving to lead the Islamic world and seeking to balance against Israel as the region's nuclear power.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I argue that Iran's adoption of this approach without taking its internal and external capacities into consideration has ironically bolstered the Israeli far right, increased global sympathies for Israel, escalated Iranophobia, aligned conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Iran's foreign policy has strengthened the right-wing parties inside Israel, mobilized international sympathy toward Tel Aviv, escalated Iranophobia, united the conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
In the paper
“The Abraham Accords have redirected the Arab-Israeli anti-Iran coalition toward a strategy to contain Iran with US supervision, Israeli management, and Arab financial and military support.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2] 2. Louise Fawcett, "Iran and the Regionalization of (In)security," International Politics 52, no. 5 (2015): 646-656. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Meanwhile, the excessive support for Palestinians and neglect of almost all other Muslimssuch as those in China (Uyghurs), Russia (Chechens), and India (Kashmiris)-have marginalized Iran's Palestine approach in the minds of the world's Muslim and Iranian observers.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I argue that Iran's adoption of this approach without taking its internal and external capacities into consideration has ironically bolstered the Israeli far right, increased global sympathies for Israel, escalated Iranophobia, aligned conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Iran's foreign policy has strengthened the right-wing parties inside Israel, mobilized international sympathy toward Tel Aviv, escalated Iranophobia, united the conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I argue that Iran's adoption of this approach without taking its internal and external capacities into consideration has ironically bolstered the Israeli far right, increased global sympathies for Israel, escalated Iranophobia, aligned conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Iran's foreign policy has strengthened the right-wing parties inside Israel, mobilized international sympathy toward Tel Aviv, escalated Iranophobia, united the conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iran intends through anti-Israel actions and messaging to internally mobilize its populace and, externally, to claim the leadership of the Muslim world and strike a balance against a regional nuclear power.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Israel's progress toward Iran's borders creates potential and actual threats against Iran.54”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Israeli Progress Toward Iran's Borders
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [54]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I argue that Iran's adoption of this approach without taking its internal and external capacities into consideration has ironically bolstered the Israeli far right, increased global sympathies for Israel, escalated Iranophobia, aligned conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Iran's foreign policy has strengthened the right-wing parties inside Israel, mobilized international sympathy toward Tel Aviv, escalated Iranophobia, united the conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
- Probably not a substantial claim. 25
- It may state two separate claims as one. 21
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Constructivists hold that values and norms cannot be underestimated when analyzing the behavior of governments, whose perceptions of the world shape how they act.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We cannot understand the complex nature of Iran-Israel relations through a single theory.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“According to realism, states act based on cost-benefit calculations, with the goal of preserving power, security, and welfare.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, Iran's foreign policy has advanced the cause of Israel's far right and been an obstacle to forces who pursue peace.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Bolstering Radical Rightists in Israel
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The confrontation has not left cyberspace or civilians untouched.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“International politics is thus a rivalry whose sources of action are based on values, images, and ideas.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5] 5. Mehdi Ghãsemi and Keyhan Barzgar, "The Strategy of Israel's Existential Threat and Iran's National Security," Foreign Relations Quarterly 5, no. 1 (2013): 187-188.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In recent years, Iran's nuclear activities and its threat to wipe Israel from the map, as well as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial, have seriously escalated its conflict with Israel.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By denouncing Israel, the Islamic Republic has disregarded geopolitical reality and spearheaded conduct that is not sensible, according to rationalist/materialist paradigms.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, these moves have ironically led Arab states to moderate their positions and pushed them closer to Israel.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The identities and interests of agents are formed by shared ideas and are, therefore, flexible rather than stable.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] 4. Amin Saikal, "Shadowy War between Iran and Israel at Risk of Escalation," Australian Strategic Policy Institute, July 15, 2021, https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/shadowy-war-between-iran-and-israel-at-risk-of-escalation/.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Concerning the second part of the question, it is worth remembering that supporting Muslims worldwide is an ideal enshrined in Iran's constitution, especially under Article 154, and has remained one of the strictest principles of the Islamic Republic's diplomacy over the past 40 years.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Here, norms have no role in state actions; they only influence behavior when they are enforced by powerful agents.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] 8. Ali Keshtgar, "The Islamic Republic: 40 years in Service of the Israeli Radicals," Mihan News, May-June 2018, http:// mihan.net/1397/03/20/1419/, 42.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This trend progressed to the extent that during the last months of Donald Trump's presidency, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Sudan de-escalated conflicts with the Jewish state and even let Israeli embassies open in their capitals.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“although Iran's conflict with Israel began as ideological, it has gradually assumed strategic aspects and turned from an identityideologic conflict into a politico-strategic one.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“According to realism, the global stage is anarchic, and states need to constantly fight for survival and preserve their interests; they therefore need to be powerful.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Over the many years of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's rule, Israel has not shied away from assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists and attacking nuclear facilities.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two countries have targeted each other, whether in Syria or on the high seas, to fortify their strategic positions.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Thus, Iran's unilateralism in its Israel policy has frustrated its internal affairs and crippled regional cooperation, and it has allowed Israel the chance to enter alliances with its former enemies.51”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Internal Dissatisfaction, External Marginalization
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [51]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other Arab states, including Oman, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, also developed informal relationships with Israel.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iran's enmity with Israel is ideological in the first place and strategic in the second.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For four decades, anti-Israel messages and policies have been major components of Iran's foreign policy.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Norms give agents an understanding of their identities and interests, and these constructs define their behavior.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In recent years, Iran's nuclear activities and its threat to wipe Israel from the map, as well as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial, have seriously escalated its conflict with Israel.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The state's understanding is not simply a reflection of objective, material realities; instead, intervening variables like norms, values, and culture play major roles.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > USING CONSTRUCTIVISM AND REALISM TO ANALYZE IRAN
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iran's nuclear program, regional influence, and support for Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah are direct strategic threats to Israel that have facilitated the strengthening of the Israeli far right.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iran is the only country that has promulgated the annihilation of Israel as its formal policy and has defined its regional relations and strategies accordingly.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, Iran's formal approach to the annihilation of Israel and its support for any attack against it seem to legitimize any level of Israeli enmity against the Islamic Republic in the name of self-defense.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Allegations of Breaching International Agreements
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iran has failed to fulfill religious beliefs, human and moral duties, and national interests.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > IRAN VS. ISRAEL: HUMAN CONSCIENCE OR NATIONAL INTERESTS?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iran's actions on the Palestine issue have empowered the far right in Israel and brought division among Palestinian groups.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iran's Palestine policy in the past decades, instead of bringing welfare to Palestinians and peace to the region, has put the population into an endless quagmire of conflict.”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > IRAN VS. ISRAEL: HUMAN CONSCIENCE OR NATIONAL INTERESTS?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Considering that Iran's foreign policy toward Israel has led to no concrete results for Iranians and Palestinians in four decades, the author suggests that:”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
In the recent past, the Arabs' precondition for the normalization of relations with Israel was to guarantee Palestinian rights.
“While, in the recent past, the Arabs' precondition for the normalization of relations with Israel was to guarantee Palestinian rights, Israel is no longer obliged to do so in order to enter peace talks or sign the Abraham Accords.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Iran's foreign policy is primarily driven by ideology rather than national interests.
“With their ideological and idealistic worldview, Iranian leaders have posed as the head of the arrow that targets imperialism and Zionism-without provisioning for the economic and public opinion underpinnings required to make this work.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Israel's actions toward Iran are primarily driven by security concerns.
“To ensure its security and contain the influence of Iran's Shiite revolutionism and political Islam, Israel has opted to normalize relations and make economic, political, and security investments in nearby states like the Republic of Azerbaijan, Iraqi Kurdistan, Bahrain, and the UAE.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The US-Israel relationship is driven by the issue of Palestine.
“Most experts on the Middle East confirm that the Iranian-US relationship is driven by the issue of Palestine.”
The paper relies on this without support.
International institutions are pro-Israel.
“Iran has overlooked the accepted methods for condemning Israel's expansionist policies, conceiving of the moderate approaches of other countries as servitude to Israel and Zionism, as well as reliance on international institutions it sees as pro-Israeli.57”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Through proxy alliances and a nuclear program, Iran enhances its deterrence capabilities, giving it greater control over Middle Eastern geopolitics (Roomi, 2023).”
From Theoretical Analysis of the Iran and Israel Conflict: Identity, Power, and Ideology (2025) · cites this paper as Roomi, 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Bolstering Radical Rightists in Israel
“Iran's regular threats, such as carving "down with Israel" in Hebrew on missiles carrying nuclear warheads, have provided the far right with the material necessary to win elections.48”
§ The Iran-Israel Conflict: An Ultra-Ideological Explanation > Balancing Against a Nuclear Rival
“as long as Israel is the sole atomic power in the region, the desired balance is not achievable.30”
Citations
Cites
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- [5]5. Mehdi Ghãsemi and Keyhan Barzgar, "The Strategy of Israel's Existential Threat and Iran's National Security," Foreign Relations Quarterly 5, no. 1 (2013): 187-188.
- [6]6. "Chapter One: Tehran's Strategic Intent," in Iran's Network of Influence in the Middle East (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2019), https://www.iiss.org/publications/strategic-dossiers/iran-dossier/iran-19-03-ch-1- tehrans-strategic-intent.
- [7]7. Razieeh Mousavifar, "Iran-US Relations: The Problem of Israel," Politics Quarterly 46, no. 2 (2016): 50.
- [10]10. Rusi Jaspel, "Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism in Iran: The Role of Identity Processes," Contemporary Jewry 35, no. 3 (2015): 211-35.
- [11]11. Gideon Levy, "Israel: A Different View from Within," Mihan News, May-June 2018, http://mihan.net/1397/03/20/1414/, 44-45. 14754967, 2023, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mepo.12687 by Mount Vernon Nazarene University, Wiley Online Library on [21/01/2026]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Cited by
Sorted by citations
(2024) · doi:10.1080/02185377.2024.2381466 · Cited by 5
“According to Roomi (2023), Iran’s foreign policy toward Israel has ironically ‘bolstered the Israeli far right, increased global sympathies for Israel, escalated Iranophobia, aligned conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine.’”
Iran’s Palestinian Policy after Hamas’ 7 October Attack
(2025) · doi:10.33206/mjss.1567000 · Cited by 2
The Iran–Israel rivalry and its implications: Gulf states’ responses to the war in Gaza
(2026) · doi:10.1007/s43545-026-01710-3
“In a few weeks, the Islamic revolution introduced a revolutionary Islamist identity which rejected Israel and the West; Iran adopted an anti-Israel ideology and cut all its diplomatic and busi - ness relations (Bani Issa 2025 ; Vahedi et al. 2025; Roomi 2023).”
Theoretical Analysis of the Iran and Israel Conflict: Identity, Power, and Ideology
Siddiqi, M. U., & Windy Khairunnisa, B. (2025) · Journal of Islamic Civilization and Culture Review · doi:10.58524/jiccr.v1i1.21
Metadata
- Authors
- Roomi, F.
- Affiliations
- Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz (IR)
- Corresponding author
- Roomi, Farshad
- ORCID
- Roomi, Farshad
- Venue
- Middle East Policy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-05-10
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 94-109
- ISSN
- 1061-1924 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-4967
- OpenAlex
- W4376141091
- Semantic Scholar
- 3bd09620f22888b2f4870877fa567eb6c3ed6420
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3
- FWCI
- 4.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Middle East Policy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Middle East Politics and Society
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies
- Keywords
- Iran-Israel conflict, Iranian foreign policy, ideological mobilization, Iranian nuclear program, Iranian diaspora, Arab-Israeli relations, Palestine, constructivism, realism, regional security
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
