In anticipation of possible retaliation by Iran for the elimination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh – and given Hezbollah’s very significant attempt at retaliation (although relatively limited in scope) for the elimination of their de facto military chief Fuad Shukr – there are analysts and commentators who for weeks have been saying that the Iranians and their allies seek to act in a way that would avoid sparking a full-scale regional war.
The thinking goes that given Israel’s degrading of Hezbollah capabilities up to this point, including now a highly effective preemptive strike on numerous Hezbollah projectile launch sites, Iran’s central and most powerful proxy is in no position to fight a major war with the Nation of Israel.
Add to this the growing discontent amongst Lebanon’s diverse population with Hezbollah’s actions and rhetoric, and it seems that the Shi’ite terror army will continue trying to limit its confrontation with Israel to a war of attrition.
Concerning Iran, the theory goes that neither does the Islamic Republic want to start the major war of destruction against Israel now that it has been planning for decades, instead preferring to initiate it once it would have at least a minimal number of crude nuclear devices.
When it comes to Yemen’s Houthis, one of Iran’s other central proxies, they have suffered a major blow with Israel’s devastating strike on their main port of Hodeidah and its fuel depot – fuel used, among other things, for powering major weapons platforms as well as other military infrastructure. As such, they have also become more cautious in their moves against Israel – for now.
Paying close attention to recent comments from various Iranian officials also gives the impression that while Tehran may attempt to act against Israel at any moment, that attempt might be delayed even further; that, perhaps, Iran’s retaliation will wait for better operational circumstances, including a possible target of opportunity presenting itself – or for the supply and delivery of new defensive and offensive weapons platforms from Russia to Iran or from one of its other allies.
The Iranians might also want Hezbollah to further engage in a heightened exchange of fire with Israel in attempts to preoccupy the country, before attempting a retaliatory action of their own.
Taking proactive measures
IN THE meantime, and in addition to Israel’s tailored pre-emptive strike against certain Hezbollah targets on August 25, Jerusalem has taken other calculated, proactive measures against the threat of the Iranian axis vow of revenge. An unknown party executed a mysterious cyberattack crippling Iran’s banking system, and intensified Israeli airstrikes have destroyed Hezbollah and Iranian targets in Lebanon and Syria in recent weeks.
Additionally, continued and very clear warnings have been conveyed by the Europeans and Americans to Hezbollah and Iran, that Israel’s patience is limited and that it intends to respond to attempted attacks against it with massive and overwhelming force. The pre-emptive strike early Sunday morning is an iteration of that warning.
Given these developments, it is indeed logical to assume that Iran would alter its planning and strategy for a response to Haniyeh’s and Shukr’s unnatural deaths. The Iranians are also taking into account that back in April – in response to their targeting Israel directly with a huge barrage of missiles and drones – a strike attributed to Jerusalem stealthily and precisely destroyed a sensitive and central component of Iran’s air defense network near one of the country’s coveted nuclear sites.
The unpreparedness of the Iranian axis for full-scale war, its sense of bad timing for a major escalation, the blows it has already taken – and the fact that Israel is already fighting a multifront conflict, albeit at mid intensity, with all that entails domestically and internationally – are precisely why Israel must take the initiative now.
IN SUCH a strategic and geopolitical environment – when your enemy does not feel ready for war, has been degraded in morale, confidence and capabilities, and is concerned with preserving its remaining resources and capabilities to fight the war it desires at a future time of its choosing – that is exactly the time to go to war with such an enemy, who plans for and seeks your ultimate destruction.
Be offensive now instead of defensive later, when the threat will be even greater. Following on its successful pre-emptive strikes, continue to be the bold IDF that takes the initiative, as the best defense is always a strong offense.
This is a war of survival, as it has been from the moment Hamas-ISIS butchers crossed into Israeli territory on the early morning of October 7, 2023. Israel must clear the deck as it were of the existential threats that have been forming around it – for nearly thirty years.
First and foremost is the Iranian nuclear program, which is at the center of Iran’s ambition to create a Mahdist neo-Persian empire, an ambition from which all the other major threats to Israel’s survival come forth.
Secondly is Hezbollah, the vanguard of Iran’s budding imperial forces. It is the anchor of the Iranian regime’s ring of fire around Israel, which it has built up over decades, and as such must be decimated and removed as a strategic threat.
And finally, any of Iran’s other imperial proxies who would be activated as part of its ring of fire need to be neutralized for being a direct threat to Israel.
In the immediate aftermath of the Hamas-ISIS invasion and massacre on October 7, 2023, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly said that the State of Israel was now “going to change the Middle East.” An opportunity to do so at the highest strategic level has presented itself: It needs to be seized upon.
The writer is an Israeli hi-tech entrepreneur and a member of the Israel Leadership Forum. He is involved with various Israel advocacy causes including working with Christian Zionist and pro-Israel Noahide groups.