1) Going to pre-emptive war, in a democratic country, requires an immediate and clear justification. The Israeli government and the IDF claim that this reason is an “Iranian dash to the bomb in recent days.” As of now, no evidence has been presented for this. Claims are also being made about the production of ballistic missiles and the completion of a new underground facility. These are not acceptable arguments in international law or in the international arena.
2) The truth is that Netanyahu was looking for an excuse to go to war, for personal and political reasons that every Israeli and every international player understands well. It remains to be seen whether the security and intelligence apparatus played a role in the decision-making process or whether they succumbed to Netanhyahu and instead cooperated with the dubious considerations of the political echelon. There is a serious concern that an “historic operational opportunity,” and the need to marginalize 10/7 and the failed war in Gaza, influenced the senior professional echelons as well.
3) Defining war goals, as Israelis have learned or at least should have learned, is a critical issue. The government failed and keeps failing in this against Hamas in Gaza. The real goals of the war have not yet been revealed. But it can be assumed that they include a significant delay in the Iranian nuclear project (a year? two years?), damage to the production of missiles and UAVs, and – less clearly, but apparently – destabilizing the regime to the point of overthrowing it.
4) At the moment it is still too early to assess the extent to which the nuclear and missile capabilities have been damaged, and it is certainly too early to guess whether and to what extent the regime has been destabilized. What can be estimated with a high degree of probability is that Iran will declare that Israel is the aggressor, and that this position will be supported by Russia and China, and the bloc of “non-aligned” countries, i.e. most of the member states of the UN. It is also likely that Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, and the Arab states will join this position. As for the EU-3,they have so far adopted a moderately supportive position, based on Israel’s right of self defense. This may suggest they have been presented with classified intelligence on Iran’s weaponization activities.
5) US and Israel – Netanyahu has been trying for decades to drag the US into a war with Iran. Democratic presidents understood and prevented this. Trump in his first term was tempted to eliminate Soleimani – who was acting against the US in Iraq and Syria – but publicly said that Netanyahu “disappointed him”’ when he did not cooperate. It is unclear what Trump’s current calculation is, and how it serves US interests, if at all. The Iranians have made it clear in advance, as they have done in the past, that they consider Israel a proxy of the US, and any Israeli move will trigger a response from them towards American targets too. As is known, the US has partially evacuated facilities in the Middle East in recent days. The official US line is “we knew about the Israeli plan, but we did not cooperate.” And “if Iran responds, we will respond too.” Apparently, the administration hopes to force Iran back to the negotiating table with fewer cards and under more pressure to reach an agreement. Such a scenario cannot be ruled out, but it is unlikely and requires a unique constellation. It is more likely that Iran will enter a long phase of open war against Israel, and possibly of a proxy war against the US throughout the Middle East. Trump may find himself leading a “Big War” in the Middle East, in complete contradiction to his promises to American voters.
6) Perhaps the most important point – Iran operates under a doctrine of “strategic patience.” It has been building its nuclear project for about 40 years. It will not give it up overnight, even if the Israeli military achievement surpasses all imagination. One could almost say – “on the contrary.” Apparently, the Netanyahu regime has given the Iranian regime internal and possibly even partial international legitimacy to obtain nuclear weapons. The Iranian narrative could be – “our civilian nuclear facilities, and military and civilian targets on our territory, were attacked by a rogue nuclear state, whose head is a war criminal wanted by the ICC. Under these circumstances, we have the right and the duty not only to defend ourselves, but also to arm ourselves with nuclear weapons.”
7) In conclusion – Netanyahu has opened a new era in the Middle East. An era of Israeli-Iranian “nuclear war.” A war whose stated reason is to stop the nuclear project, but which is in fact a threat to the nucleus of the Iranian regime. This is not an “operation,” this is not a “campaign,” and this is not even “another war.” This is a new page in Israeli history. And the conditions and circumstances and the actors operating on the Israeli side are horrifying. No Israeli war has been waged by so few and such an incompetent group of politicians, who have destroyed the state’s institutions and its decision-making processes, and who are all driven by alien considerations. And when a clearly incompetent president sits in Washington, who is also weakening and dismantling American democracy and the institutions of the state there with alarming force and pace – history retreats in fear.