Home News Israel’s choices in response to Iran attack come with risks

Israel’s choices in response to Iran attack come with risks

27
0

“It is clearly legal for Israel to attack Iran,” said Yaakov Amidror, a former major general and national security adviser who now works at the conservative Jerusalem Institute for Strategic and Security Studies.

“The alternative is that we achieve what we want by taking out the Quds Force commander in Damascus, the Iranian attack failed, so let’s do what we need to do,” he said – which means getting it done Target Hamas operations in Gaza and invest in preparations to confront Hezbollah in Lebanon.

“Both are good choices,” he said. “Each has advantages and disadvantages. It’s a matter of preference.”

Foreign leaders, chief among them President Joe Biden, Israel’s most important supporter, have been urging restraint. Netanyahu has not publicly threatened Iran since the attack ended on Sunday morning. Other Israeli military and political leaders said they wanted to preserve and strengthen, rather than jeopardize, an alliance of Western and moderate Arab countries, which for the first time came together to repel Iranian attacks and defend Israel.

The Iranian attack has brought an explosion of international support to Israel after months of condemnation and condemnation over the extent of killing and starvation in Gaza, which some officials said means Israel can only take action against Iran in coordination with allies.

“Israel versus Iran, the world versus Iran,” Benny Gantz, a centrist member of Israel’s war cabinet, said on Sunday as he laid out his options. “The strategic alliance and regional cooperation system between us have been severely tested, and now is the time for us to strengthen the strategic alliance and regional cooperation system. We will build a regional alliance to counter the Iranian threat and provide support to us in a way and time that suits us. Iran demands price.”

Israel’s options range from openly striking Iran with token or full force to no retaliation at all, a concession that experts say Israel could use to encourage further international sanctions or formalize an anti-Iran coalition.

There is precedent for inaction: During the 1991 Gulf War, Israel’s hawkish Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir showed restraint when Iraq dropped Scud missiles on Israeli cities. At the urging of the Bush administration Preserve U.S.-led alliances with friendly Arab states.

Israel could also orchestrate some kind of bloodless cyberattack, or resume its years-long shadow war with Iran, relying on espionage and covert operations to target Iranian interests inside and outside Iran without claiming responsibility.

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here