[“The following copyrighted article is shared
with permission, and courtesy of theartpulse.com”]
Source link
Israeli security and military analysts said today, Tuesday, that Iran recorded a “strategic victory” in the military escalation earlier this week, and that this escalation was a “real defeat” for Israel, especially since it was clear that the Israeli attack in the southern suburb of Beirut would be followed by Iranian missile attacks.
Ronen Bergman, intelligence affairs analyst at Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, pointed out that this round of escalation “initiated by the Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and was apparently supposed to end with the resumption of the war with Iran, for Israel at least, and ended with a faint sound 24 hours later, was also an embarrassing strategic defeat, as well as an example of this whole strange war.”
He added, “It appears to be the real defeat…and the Israeli attack in the suburb did not occur in a vacuum. It was carried out after it was clear that a major Israeli targeting in the Lebanese arena would lead to a direct Iranian response. Therefore, once such an operation was carried out, Israel was obligated to take into account, and certainly it took into account, a scenario in which Iran sees itself as committed to responding.”
He continued, “This means that the attack in the suburb was not just a local operation against Lebanon or Hezbollah, but rather a step that reconnected the Lebanese and Iranian arenas, instead of continuing the policy of separating them, and Israel practically created the ‘Unity of Squares’ arena on its initiative.”
According to Bergman, “The Americans did not want to open a new front against Iran, and they did not want Israel to open such a front. Even if they knew about some of the Israeli steps, it seems that they did not fully realize the dynamic that this process would ignite.”
He stressed that “Israel acted in a way that led to an Iranian reaction, and after that it responded itself inside Iran, and at this stage it became clear that the Americans were not interested in allowing this step to lead to a broader war.”
Bergman added, “The Iranian missile launch did not necessarily aim to open a comprehensive war, but rather to establish an equation. For Iran, the mere ability to respond directly, and to confirm its size, goals, and timing was no less important than the damage that was inflicted. It sought to end the round with the last word in its hands, and to a great extent it succeeded in doing so.”
According to the military analyst on the Zaman Yisrael website and Israeli Army Radio, Amir Bar Shalom, “In the current round, Iran may have obtained resounding proof of its military weakness as a result of the Israeli Air Force attacks, but at the strategic level it triumphed. The defensive umbrella that Tehran spread over Hezbollah received the approval of the White House again.”
He added, “The equation of ‘Beirut is like Tehran’ remained the same. Netanyahu faced great difficulty in explaining this reality. The realization in the Israeli government was that Israeli silence, and worse still, operational restraint, would immediately establish the rules of a new game. Such a situation expands the Iranian umbrella to southern Lebanon as well. Iran has proven in this round that it is ready to go far compared to the era of the former Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, who repeatedly curbed the demands of extremists in “But in reality, imposing Iranian sponsorship on Hezbollah would be at the core of Iran’s policy later.”
Bar Shalom considered that he “expects the resumption of talks between Israel and the Lebanese government in Washington during the next two weeks. In Hezbollah’s eyes, they are considered one of the biggest threats to it and constitute a joint opportunity for Israel and the Lebanese government. For the first time, this is not a military force threatening Hezbollah, but rather this is a political grip imposed on it under international auspices.”
