The Meaning of Israel’s Attack on Iran

Israel, Iran, the Axis, Western Europe and the United States

What does the Iranian attack mean for Israel, Iran, the Axis, Western Europe and for the United States?

The attack was clearly limited in nature as Israel attacked production facilities and some Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRG) command centers but neither did strategic damage to Iran nor did it weaken the regime. It is difficult to judge Israel’s political and military leadership regarding the limited attack since we don’t really know what threats the Biden-Harris team made to Israel.   Besides an arms embargo, the current administration can no longer be trusted not to tell Iran details of the attack.  Two leaks over the past week combined with the promotion in the Pentagon of Ariane Tabatabai, the colleague of Rob Malley, the Democrat’s chief Iranian appeaser and a woman who has previous ties to Iran, means that the actual success or failure of the mission could be dependent upon the administration and its instructions to the US military’s Central Command.

Rather than judge if the attack was strong enough or not, let’s take a look at the situation, post-attack.

For Israel, it has proven to the Iranians that their air defenses are paper tigers as their aircraft penetrated deep into Iran and all aircraft returned to base safe and unharmed.  Israel destroyed S-300 anti-aircraft batteries as well as various production facilities for ballistic missiles and drones.   The S-300 destruction is important for any future attack however it is not clear if the factory bombings will have more than short term effects on Iran’s production abilities.

For Israel the attack was a success although it did not reach the level of bluster of the IDF spokesman or Israel’s Minister of Defense, Galant.  If it is a prelude to more extensive attacks then it can be viewed as one more tactical victory on the road to changing Israel’s strategic position in the middle east and in the world.  This can be viewed as a continuation of the beeper and walkie talkie attacks, the killing of Nasrallah and the top Hezbollah leadership, the destruction of much of Hezbollah’s firepower and the limited ground incursion in southern Lebanon meant to destroy their pre-placed ammunition and the tunnel networks near the border.  We can add to that the attacks on Iran and Hezbollah positions in Syria – attacks which have caused a feud in Syria’s top leadership over their relationship with Iran. 

President Bashar Asaad and his brother Maher, commander of one of the main divisions of the Syrian Army have split over their loyalty to Russia or to Iran.   It seems that the Russians and Bashar feel that more intensive Israeli attacks might lead to the fall of the Asaad regime  and Maher feels more loyalty to Iran.  Russia, which on the one hand has been cementing ties with Iran has, on the other hand, ordered IRG and Hezbollah forces away from Russian bases in Syria – although Russian arms sent to Syria have been captured by Israel in south Lebanon.  Russia wants to be in bed with Iran but they want to assure the stability of their other allies.    Although this won’t lead to a real split between Russia-Syria and Iran it at least provides a level of deterrence. 

Israel, after these attacks, has placed itself in a better strategic position vis a vis Iran – even if we feel that it has not done enough.   Israel ought to finally declare war on the Islamic Republic of Iran after decades of terror attacks on Israeli and Jewish targets, Hezbollah attacks and Hamas and Islamic Jihad terror.  Israel ought to slowly attack IRG assets – like the Iranian Navy – while it is “waiting” for US approval to finally destroy their nuclear facilities.  But Israel is certainly in a better position to defeat Iran (should it decide to do so) now after this series of attacks, than it was even in the beginning of the summer.

What of Iran, post attack?   If Israel is in a better strategic position, is Iran in a worse one?  In short, the answer is certainly yes.  This attack, even though it was limited – or maybe because it was limited – shows the world in general and the Arab world in particular that its decades of dedication to destroy Israel has left its home front vulnerable.  They have one strategic and one tactical card left – the nuclear option and their continued funding of terror against Jews and Israel respectively.

Regarding the West, curiously, it is the countries most hostile to Russia, France and the UK, that feel the most responsibility in protecting Russia’s main ally (outside of China), Iran.  For those like Macron whose bluster includes talk of  sending French ground troops to Ukraine, one would think that the destruction of Iran’s drone and missile factories would help protect those troops of his and he would support Israel in this war, but one would be wrong.  Western European Mideast policy is being exposed for what it is – an anti-semitic policy aimed to deter Israel from defeating its enemies – those same enemies that look to destroy the European political system as it has existed at least since WWII. This policy is a jumble of contradictions as it vociferously fights the Axis on one front while allying with it on another.    Regarding the anti-semitism, the only question is if it is the old style European aristocratic kind, of the new Jihadi kind?  Practically speaking the difference is academic.

The position of the United States is more difficult to analyze.  The US has no sizable Moslem, let alone Jihadi population (yet), in spite of the obsession over Michigan, but the US’s Davos set seems intent on keeping Israel in a constant war of attrition as it opposes every Israeli military plan to shorten the war by destroying its enemies.  The US defense industry is pretty happy with Israeli victories and the jobs created not only by Israeli purchases but by the performance of US arms by Israel.   There seems to be no better marketing tool than F-15’s, 16’s and 35’s making a joke of Russian supplied air defenses.  One could argue that Israel single handedly saved the F35 program as not too long ago the US media was pillaging the jet as a wasteful failure.

Economics aside (and in the US economics can never be fully set aside) there is still strong support for Israel in the general population.   This attack has on the one hand, strengthened the position of America’s arms industry and on the other hand showed the American public of the cowardly position of the Biden-Harris administration when faced with fanatical, jihadist enemies.   While Putin for Biden is the new Hitler (see his last State of the Union speech) the one regime that actually wants to finish what Hitler started, is appeased and protected in preventing Israel from destroying those very assets that keep the regime alive.

And what of the Axis?  Russia and China have to be disappointed that Iran cannot defend itself from US arms but they will surely double down on their support for Iran as they see that the Biden-Harris team is not ready for any confrontation – even one that does not include its own troops.  This attack showed Iran’s weakness, Israel and America’s technological and tactical superiority as well as the fickle nature of US support for allies fighting the very Axis that looks to overwhelm American power in every region it can. Ukraine is holding its own in Europe although one has to wonder how long it can challenge Axis power with North Korea and Iran becoming more involved. The Philippines is trying its best to hold off Chinese encroachment.  No one really knows how Taiwan will perform in a Chinese attack or blockade.   Israel is the only country confronting the Axis that has a clear road to victory and this attack, if it did anything, showed the weakness of Iran and the Axis when confronted by a well trained and determined enemy and the bankrupt nature of Western and US policy.

The Axis is in a weaker situation due to this attack but only if Israel is permitted to turn this into a real victory.  There are those in the know who claim that the main purpose of the attack was to test Iranian air defenses and to prepare for a greater attack and that may be the case.  If that is so and if Israel has plans for further and more substantial attacks, the defeat of Iran could be the one thing that can prevent further Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific and Russian victory in Ukraine.  Iran is the weakest link in the Axis but their defeat might be the one that ends WWIII early.

A change in the Biden-Harris policy of appeasement by their own realization of its absurdity or by a Trump victory  - or Israel’s ignoring the Biden-Harris dictates (as Nial Furgeson in an excellent piece in The Free Press  feels Israel is already doing) will do more for “world peace” than any self-congratulatory UN declaration or NATO conference ever can.