Yup. Iran tried to LARP as a major power and is now paying the price of that delusion.
What Iran needs is to take a breather from geopolitics and focus on, to borrow someone's saying, 'reform and opening-up'. Whether it would be better for them to do that under a nuclear shield is a major decision they have to make - and soon.
Türkiye has a better shot at containing the Israelis / helping the Palestinians in the medium- to long-term than Iran has.
Unfortunately, that's not a viable path forward for Iran due to systematic Western sanctions.
With the crushing of Iran's entire military leadership today by israel air strikes, does this present a new opening for the export of J-35 and other advanced (think beyond J-10ce) platforms to middle east countries?
If Israel can decapitate the leadership of any middle east country on a whim, we all know it aint gonna be US/European weapon systems that are going to save them.
Chinese defense majors have been benefiting from the ebbs and flows of Middle Eastern tensions since at least the 1980s.
The sale of DF-3 IRBMs to Saudi Arabia, in IIRC 1988, at a time when Riyadh didn't even have official diplomatic relations with Beijing being the most visible example.
There's no reason why the current round of tensions won't give Middle Eastern nations cause to increase defense spending and acquire some new toys that they otherwise would have refrained from, and some of those toys will inevitably come from China given the political strings attached to arms on offer from the US.
Though whether this turns into a windfall for Chinese defense majors might depend on how the US handles things.
If the US acts in a way that reaffirms their security commitment to Arab states in the region, American defense majors like Lockheed and General Dynamics will inevitably reap the rewards as Arab states seek to demonstrate their loyalty to and love for America.
OTOH if the US behaves in ways that gives Arab states cause to doubt America's ability or willingness to guarantee their security, then there's a reasonable chance that some of these countries will prioritize the acquisition of Chinese arms which they can employ to defend themselves over American arms which they frequently acquire under the assumption that doing so will strengthen de facto American security guarantees.
Does a newly urgent need to address the capability gap between GCC and Israel present an opportunity for China to stop "underpricing" its now combat-proven platforms relative to their true value -> the guarantee of arab territorial sovereignty?
While China is known for its highly competitive manufacturing sector, when it comes to goods like 5th gen fighters, manufacturing costs are fairly comparable regardless of origin.
Though with certain other big ticket items like ballistic missiles, the Chinese are known to be ahead of just about everyone else in terms of both production capacity and costs.
You mean back when the US wasn't the main ally and backer of Israel to the point the US wouldn't sell any advanced weaponry to them and they relied mostly on France?. There is a reason why most of Israel weapons until the 70's was copies of French weapons and WW2 stuff.
China isn't an ally or backer of Israel whatsoever.
So even less reason to expect the Israelis to treat Chinese peacekeepers with decency that they fail to show UN peacekeepers from lesser powers.
Famous last words. Like I said, you are going to get Minsk'd.
What does "Minsk'd" even mean?
Why has it taken Iran so long to respond? Does it just take that much time for them to prepare their attack? Or did Israel really do serious damage to their organizational structure with these strikes?
Considering how long it took for Iran to respond to Israeli provocations last year, the Iranians aren't lagging just yet, especially if we're to consider the sort of response that would commensurate with the Israeli strikes.
