Occupied Jerusalem Amidst the gradual escalation on multiple fronts and security tensions,The Middle EastIsrael found itself facing three options to respond to Iran’s threats to implementHezbollah Attacks on it, in response to the assassination of the head of the political bureau ofHamas Movement Ismail Haniyeh In Tehran, the military leader Fouad Shukr In Beirut.
With the continued anticipation, and in light of the psychological warfare that the Israeli home front is experiencing due to the delayed response, and the uncertainty regarding the destination of the missiles and drones that may be launched from Iran and Lebanon, and whether the response will be joint between the multiple fronts or limited to Hezbollah, Israel faces challenges and differences in positions and strategies regarding the effectiveness of the comprehensive war.
Israeli analysts' readings addressed the available options to confront the attacks and ways to respond to them, amidst consensus estimates that the gradual escalation and mutual threat to launch attacks – even if limited – portend a comprehensive confrontation, even if it is postponed to this stage.
Israel's three options
Readings by military and political analysts and researchers in Iranian and Middle Eastern affairs estimated that Israel has three options: the first is to reach an agreement to return the Israeli detainees, and a ceasefire on the front. Gazawhich would likely lead to a ceasefire on the northern front with Lebanon.
The second is to continue the war of attrition with Hezbollah, whose end is not in sight, but the circle of participants is expanding with time, according to the Israeli military intelligence.safety“Other armed organizations in the Middle East that are mobilizing to participate in the fighting on multiple fronts derive this from the state of chaos and the poor strategic situation of Israel.
In light of the complexities of the scene on the northern front with Lebanon, and the Prime Minister’s refusal Benjamin Netanyahu Stopping the war on the Gaza front leaves Israel with the third option of launching a preemptive strike against Hezbollah, and there are those who are also pushing for launching a similar strike against Iran by destroying its nuclear project, which means a devastating war.
In reading these options, the Israeli army reserve colonel, Yom Tov Samia, the former commander of theGaza Band The commander of the Southern Command said, “There is no strategic thinking in Israel about the nature of the attacks and even how to respond to them.”
He also downplayed the effectiveness of the Israeli response to any expected attacks by Iran or Hezbollah, saying in an interview with Tel Aviv Radio that “it all starts with the fact that Israel has no security strategy towards armed organizations and hostile states.”
He believes that what Israel is doing is “similar to treating cancer with painkillers and bandages, and this does not work and is ineffective,” saying that it is not possible to deter armed organizations and movements, “and anyone who knows the basics of the army knows that the concept of deterring organizations does not appear in the military lexicon.”
He expected that Israel would find itself in the future facing a comprehensive war with Lebanon, if it wanted to eliminate strategic threats, saying that “the deterrent state has something to lose,” explaining, “In 2006, Israel declared war on Hezbollah, and today, after 10 months of fighting with Hezbollah, the scenario is being repeated. This is a repetition of the mistake. War must be declared on Lebanon, which has something to lose.”
implicit threats
The same approach was adopted by Benny Sabati, a researcher in Iranian affairs at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, who reviewed in an article in the Maariv newspaper the expected attack by Iran and Hezbollah, and the nature of the Israeli response to it.
From the Israeli researcher's point of view, “Iran is not the main threat to Israel,” saying, “The real monster is here on the northern border with Lebanon. The Iranians have run out of time. There have been diplomatic efforts and implicit threats towards them, while Israel is better prepared, and therefore the Iranian threat is not as declared.”
Regarding the threat to Israel, Sabati said that Iran is the distant country, and it is not the main threat, “It is Hezbollah with its quantity of missiles and drones. Israel needs to think about how to completely eliminate these threats in Lebanon and coming from Iran. These threats have existed on the northern front for 45 years.”
Under the title “Between Gaza and Nuclear”, Amos Harel, a military analyst for Haaretz, wrote an article in which he reviewed the threats to Israel from Iran and Hezbollah, the expected attacks, and Israel's options for responding to them, noting that there are considerations for all parties to contain the mutual attacks to avoid a comprehensive war.
The military analyst says the Israeli public is taking seriously the threats of Iran and Hezbollah to carry out a missile and drone attack on the home front, in response to the recent assassinations in Beirut and Tehran.
Harel adds, “It is clear that Israel's opponents, as the fighting continues, are making a certain effort to announce their intentions and threats to strike targets deep inside Israel, in the center of the country, its north, and the greater Tel Aviv area.”
Regarding the nature of the Israeli response to the attacks from Iran and Hezbollah, the military analyst believes that the Israeli counter-warnings reflect the readiness of the air force to bomb distant targets, “which portends a comprehensive war that no party has an interest in breaking out, each for its own considerations, interests and goals.”
Harel suggested that the Israeli warnings and threats, and what he described as “American appeasement efforts” and its veiled threats, could lead to Iran and Hezbollah establishing…Houthis In Yemen and armed groups in Iraq are trying to minimize damage to Israeli civilian targets to avoid a full-scale confrontation that gets out of control.