The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia today (Tuesday) expressed its strongest condemnation of the Iranian attack targeting the US Embassy in Riyadh. The Kingdom considers this hostile act a blatant violation of its sovereignty and a direct threat to security and stability in the region, affirming its categorical rejection of such criminal acts, which contravene all international values ​​and principles.

Violation of international conventions and diplomatic immunity

The Kingdom affirmed in its statement that the repetition of this cowardly and unjustified attack blatantly violates all international norms and laws, most notably the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1961 Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic Relations. It is worth noting that the Vienna Convention explicitly stipulates the inviolability of diplomatic premises and obligates host states and all parties to protect diplomatic missions and their personnel, granting them full immunity even in cases of armed conflict. This makes this attack a grave violation of international law that warrants accountability.

A dangerous escalation despite de-escalation initiatives

The Kingdom stressed that this blatant Iranian behavior is occurring at a sensitive time, despite the Iranian authorities' full awareness of Saudi Arabia's balanced stance. The Kingdom has previously affirmed that it will not allow its airspace or territory to be used as a platform to target Iran. Analysts indicate that Tehran's attack, despite Saudi assurances, reflects a desire to push the region toward further escalation and chaos, and undermines any efforts aimed at strengthening regional security.

The right of reply and the protection of national sovereignty

In closing, the Kingdom reiterated its firm and legitimate right to take all necessary measures to protect its national security, territorial integrity, and the lives of its citizens and residents, as well as its vital interests. Riyadh clarified that all options remain on the table, including a military response to this aggression, noting that leniency towards such transgressions could embolden the aggressor to further recklessness, which the Kingdom will not permit under any circumstances.

The Israeli army officially announced today (Tuesday) the success of the assassination operation of Reza Khazaee, who is considered one of the most prominent pivotal figures in the military structure of Hezbollah, describing him as the official in charge of the “military build-up” file in the party, and the field representative of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in Lebanon.

In detailing the operation, the army statement explained that the Israeli Navy, in close coordination with Military Intelligence (Aman), carried out a focused airstrike yesterday (Monday) on an area in the Lebanese capital, Beirut. This strike resulted in the death of Khazaee, whom the statement revealed also held another sensitive position: Chief of Staff of the Iranian-backed "Lebanon Corps," making him a strategic target in Israel's target bank.

According to the intelligence cited in the statement, Khaza'i was considered the "right-hand man" of the commander of the Lebanese Corps and an indispensable central figure in Hezbollah's military buildup. His tasks focused primarily on logistical and strategic coordination between the party and Tehran, particularly regarding aligning the party's field military needs with the resources and technologies provided by Iran—a process known as "military buildup.".

Context of escalation and targeting of shadow leaders

This operation comes within the context of an intensive Israeli military and security campaign against Hezbollah's command structure and Iranian supply networks in the region. The term "military buildup" typically refers in Israeli military parlance to efforts to transfer and develop advanced weaponry, such as precision missiles, drones, and air defense systems—issues that Tel Aviv considers a red line that threatens the regional balance of power.

The targeting of a figure as influential as Reza Khazaee, who serves as a direct link to the Revolutionary Guard, reflects Israel's determination to strike at the "vital artery" that sustains Hezbollah's military capabilities. By eliminating key figures involved in liaison and military logistics, Israel seeks to cripple supply chains and disrupt military modernization plans that rely heavily on Iranian expertise and funding.

Regional dimensions of the operation

This assassination cannot be separated from the broader regional context, where a covert and overt war is being waged between Israel and the Iranian-led axis. Khazaee exemplifies the kind of commanders who operate behind the scenes to consolidate fronts and unify military efforts between Tehran and its proxies in the region. The Quds Force, which Khazaee represented, is the external arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) responsible for operations outside Iran's borders, thus giving his assassination a dimension that extends beyond the Lebanese arena to the very heart of Tehran's strategic calculations.

Observers believe that intensifying the strikes in Beirut and targeting figures responsible for coordination, financing, and arming is aimed at putting military and political pressure on Hezbollah, in light of the ongoing confrontations on the northern border, and an attempt to reduce the party’s ability to replenish its strategic stockpile of weapons in the event of a full-scale confrontation.

Amid the rapidly evolving situation in the Middle East, and as the joint US-Israeli military operations against targets in Iran entered their fourth day, new and sensitive details have emerged regarding the diplomatic maneuvering that preceded this dangerous escalation. US Special Envoy Steve Wittkopf revealed the behind-the-scenes events of the final hours of the stalled nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran during an exclusive interview with Fox News on Tuesday.

Enrichment node and external fuel supply

Wittkopf explained that the core point of contention that led to the collapse of the talks centered on the "right to enrichment." According to the US envoy, the Iranian negotiators began the sessions by firmly asserting their country's sovereign right to enrich uranium domestically. In response, the US delivered a resolute message from President Donald Trump stating that he possessed the right and the capability to halt this process if it threatened international security.

Witkoff revealed that the US administration, in a last-ditch effort to defuse the crisis, presented what it called a "fair deal." The offer included allowing Iran to obtain all its nuclear fuel needs for peaceful purposes and energy generation from reliable external sources, in exchange for abandoning enrichment activities within Iranian territory. However, Tehran categorically rejected this offer, leading the US side to conclude that the other party had no genuine intention of making substantial concessions.

The historical roots of the nuclear file crisis

To understand the dimensions of this rejection, one must consider the historical context of the Iranian nuclear conflict, which has persisted for over two decades. Tehran has consistently argued that abandoning domestic enrichment would make it beholden to the political will of fuel-supplying nations, citing past experiences where energy supplies were disrupted. Conversely, the international community, led by the United States, believes that Iran's possession of a complete nuclear fuel cycle (uranium enrichment) would significantly reduce the "breakout time" required to produce a nuclear weapon—a red line that Washington and Tel Aviv seek to prevent.

The withdrawal of the United States from the nuclear agreement (JCPOA) in 2018 marked a turning point, as Tehran gradually increased enrichment levels beyond previously permitted limits, further complicating the negotiating landscape and making a return to square one extremely difficult.

Regional and international repercussions of the failure of negotiations

The failure of this round of negotiations and the rejection of the American "deal" was not merely a passing diplomatic event, but rather the spark that paved the way for the current military escalation. This development carries serious implications for regional security, as Israel views the Iranian nuclear program as an existential threat with which it cannot coexist. Furthermore, the failure of diplomatic solutions reinforces the likelihood of a nuclear arms race in the region, as other countries may seek to acquire similar capabilities to ensure a balance of power.

Analysts assert that the deadlock in negotiations reflects a deep trust gap between the two sides, and presents the region with open scenarios ranging from the continuation of limited military operations to a slide towards a comprehensive confrontation that could redraw the geopolitical map of the Middle East.