April 23, 2024
Tel Aviv’s
underwhelming military counter to Iran’s 13 April military strike has destroyed
decades of Israel’s carefully cultivated deterrence posture.
Iran’s Operation
True Promise strikes on 13 April have reopened the deep wounds Israel incurred
during Hamas’ 7 October attack. While Operation Al-Aqsa Flood shook the
occupation state’s security bubble at its core, a single night of Iranian
rockets and drones left Israelis straggling to hold on to even a sliver of
their famed deterrence posture.
As military
spokesman for Hamas' Qassam Brigades Abu Obeida succinctly highlighted in his
23 April speech:
“Iran’s
response, in its size and nature, established new rules and confused the
enemy’s calculations.”
This is the
region’s new status quo. And Israel’s mysterious ‘Isfahan attack’ has done
nothing to shake Iran’s confidence. In short, the alleged Israeli counter has
reaffirmed the regional view – militarily, at least – that Tehran has
checkmated Tel Aviv and rewritten the rules of engagement.
After years of
provocations, and for the first time in its history, Iran has launched a direct
offensive against Israel, confidently claiming that it utilized only a fraction
of its military capabilities – many of these “obsolete” missiles within its fast-evolving
arsenal.
Iran targeted
Israel’s key Nevatim and Ramon air bases precisely, despite the spectacular
display of lights from intercepted decoy explosions that lit up the skies.
Many, quick to judge, misinterpreted the massive salvo as a sign of a broader
strategic offensive from the Unity of Fronts – the Resistance alliance that
poses a multi-front dilemma for Tel Aviv – aimed at devastating Israel in one
blow.
A slap in the
face
In fact, Iran
conducted the operation alone, which makes the seriousness of Iran’s “slap” all
the more significant.
The night of the
Iranian missile attack also demonstrated the limits of Iranian patience and
Tehran’s strategic shift from caution to calculated aggression, necessitating
the intervention of three western nuclear powers and the “Arab fig leaf,”
Jordan, to counteract the assault.
The Iranians
backed their military actions with public statements and shared images of their
commanders orchestrating the operations. Conversely, Israel’s response to the
events in Isfahan was ambiguous and poorly communicated, with only sporadic
information leaking to the US and Israeli press in a feeble attempt to project
resolve.
Iranian Foreign
Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian mocked the Israeli response in an interview
with NBC News, where he dismissed the Israeli drones as trivial, likening them
to “toys that our children play with.”
Israel’s
‘ridiculous’ comeback
Israel’s
military counter is now widely perceived as a dud, derided even within Israel
itself by figures such as Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir, who
describes it as “ridiculous.”
Despite Tel
Aviv’s formidable military arsenal, which includes undeclared nuclear weapons,
and its historical posture as a reliable western ally in the region, the events
of 13 April have exposed gaping vulnerabilities in its ability to respond to
credible threats, especially from Iran.
This
ineffectiveness was highlighted amidst the symbolism of Isfahan – home to
Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility – where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who
has long positioned himself as a stalwart against Iran’s nuclear ambitions,
appeared uncharacteristically passive.
The Israeli PM’s
lack of any tangible response was a departure from his usual hyperbole,
painting a picture of Israel as unprepared and hesitant – retreating rather
than confronting.
Furthermore,
Iran’s nuclear program has paradoxically also emerged as a potent tool in
Tehran’s strategic arsenal. The explicit warning from the Islamic Republic
about possibly revising its nuclear doctrine in response to an escalated
Israeli threat suggests a bold new stance, despite Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei’s fatwa (Islamic decree) against nuclear arms.
Is Israeli
deterrence dead?
The Isfahan
incident did little to bolster Israel’s deterrence posture, which has been
eroding since Al-Aqsa Flood and further weakened by Hezbollah’s operations in
the north and Iran’s True Promise. These events have deeply impacted the
Israeli psyche, challenging the foundational sense of security that underpins
the Zionist vision of a “secure Jewish state” established on the lands of
Palestine.
Against this
backdrop, the conventional rules of engagement that have long governed regional
interactions are being re-evaluated. Iran’s bold moves – despite US and Israeli
warnings – signal a recalibration of power dynamics, indicating a potentially
transformative period in West Asian geopolitics.
The Israeli
response, both present and future, must now consider the possibility of a
united front from the Axis of Resistance if it chooses to escalate further.
This adds a layer of complexity to any military planning against Iran, likely
prompting Israel to revert to its characteristic approach of covert operations.
These may involve sabotage or targeted assassinations attributed to local
agents rather than direct military strikes.
Meanwhile, the
US, amid its own internal political issues and upcoming elections in November,
is likely to play a dual role. It will monitor its ally’s actions closely while
trying to moderate the regional tensions to prevent any significant escalation
that could destabilize its broader strategic interests.
A point of no
return
Today, it is
Iran – not the US, not Israel, and certainly not the Isfahan attack – which has
restabilized the regional balance, even temporarily, pending the
crystallization of the new rules of engagement.
Tel Aviv’s
counterstrike tried hard to mitigate the possibility of any further Iranian
retaliation – especially as Tehran’s next move would likely come without
warning, involve Iran’s superior missiles, and potentially the mobilization of
Iranian allies toward Israel's borders.
The Axis of
Resistance was happy to allow their Iranian ally to take center stage on 13
April and exact revenge for Israel’s miscalculated 1 April bombing of Iran’s
diplomatic mission in Damascus. Any further bold moves from Tel Aviv would
ensure that the Axis would activate on every front to swarm Israel.
So, for the
moment, Tel Aviv does not dare to compromise Iran’s security directly, instead
turning their impotent rage toward vulnerable Rafah, where over a million
Palestinian civilians are stranded without food, shelter, and water.
The Hebrew media
is already spinning for all its worth, promoting Tel Aviv’s “gains” from
demonstrating restraint against Iran – whether from last week’s UN Security
Council veto of a Palestinian state or the new $26 billion aid package the US
Congress just approved for Israel, or obtaining White House support for the
occupation army’s Rafah invasion.
Dr Hussein
al-Musawi, the spokesman for the Iraqi Harakat al-Nujaba, tells The Cradle that
Israel has, in effect, received a blank check for bad behavior from Washington:
“It is not
surprising that the US supports and defends Israel, regardless of its violation
of international norms, and this undoubtedly embarrasses the Iraqi government,
which seeks to take a clear position on the US military presence in Iraq.”
For these and
many other reasons, Israeli leaders are now acutely aware that any overtly
aggressive action will not go unnoticed in the current geopolitical climate.
The region is embroiled in what could be described as a
'mini-international-regional war,' characterized by intermittent flare-ups and
periods of relative calm.
True Promise,
much like Al-Aqsa Flood before it, is poised to be recorded in history as a
pivotal, perhaps even terminal, moment for the brief history of the Israeli
occupation state, which now finds itself more isolated than ever and facing an
increasingly uncertain future.
No comments:
Post a Comment