Israel’s War on Iran Backfired

She left twelve days of war between Israel and Iran as a path of destruction across both countries. However, the clearest ready -made meals are: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bold failure. Despite the launch of one of the most bold military campaigns in the history of Israel, the war was short and punished, and in the end it was its stated targets.

I started with an Israeli attack that was carefully planned. Years of work crowned intelligence with a wave of secret operations – the bodies that were collected inside Iran, the sleeping cells separating the bombs, and the assassinations targeted by the highest military figures and scientists. They are followed by these traditional air strikes on military bases and nuclear facilities such as Natanz and Ford. But the goals of Israel extended beyond the strategic infrastructure. Residential neighborhoods, prisons, media offices and police stations were also wounded, noting a broader strategy aimed at cultivating chaos and igniting internal disorders.

She left twelve days of war between Israel and Iran as a path of destruction across both countries. However, the clearest ready -made meals are: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bold failure. Despite the launch of one of the most bold military campaigns in the history of Israel, the war was short and punished, and in the end it was its stated targets.

I started with an Israeli attack that was carefully planned. Years of work crowned intelligence with a wave of secret operations – the bodies that were collected inside Iran, the sleeping cells separating the bombs, and the assassinations targeted by the highest military figures and scientists. They are followed by these traditional air strikes on military bases and nuclear facilities such as Natanz and Ford. But the goals of Israel extended beyond the strategic infrastructure. Residential neighborhoods, prisons, media offices and police stations were also wounded, noting a broader strategy aimed at cultivating chaos and igniting internal disorders.

Human losses were amazing. In Iran, at least 610 people, including 49 women, 13 children and five health care workers. 4,746 others were injured, including 20 health care workers. The medical infrastructure also suffered from severe damage, as it hit hospitals, ambulances and emergency facilities. In Israel, Iranian missiles and drones were killed at least 28 people and wounded more than 3,200 people. More than 9,000 Israelis were displaced, and dozens of houses and public buildings have been destroyed.

With the stability of dust, the true range of damage within Iran is still unclear. This lack of clarity reveals an essential dilemma for Israel and its American allies: military power alone cannot guarantee strategic success.

Although Netanyahu pledged to dismantle Iran’s missile and nuclear programs, and the veiled hoping to follow the regime change, Iran quickly responded. The missiles were launched in Israeli cities and strategic targets. After the United States joined the conflict by bombing Iranian nuclear sites, Tehran escalated more by hitting the Al -Wadid Air Force, an American military installation in Qatar, which prompted Washington to the deepest in the crisis. Although telegraph and limited in influence, the strike on Al Udeid has sent a deliberate message: Iran can raise the risks beyond its borders.

Within only 12 days of the initial strike of Israel, the ceasefire was reached under mysterious conditions, leaving the area in an unstable interruption.

There is no doubt that Israel has achieved remarkable tactical successes, which caused severe damage to the Iranian military leadership and the scientific infrastructure. But the strategic goals have more weight. Based on the available evidence, Netanyahu’s basic goals – under Iran’s deterrence and the decline in the elements of its nuclear program, which pose the largest risk of spreading – is not spilled.

One of the most important failures lies in the nuclear file. There is no confirmation that Iran’s nuclear ability has deteriorated. While Trump administration officials have insisted that the strikes restore Iran’s program for years, the early US intelligence assessments indicate otherwise. The satellite photos taken before the strikes showed that trucks that are likely to remove sensitive equipment from the main sites, and Iran has already announced the construction of a new, confidential and strict enrichment facility that may be unexpected. More importantly, Iran’s 60 percent stock of enriched uranium and its advanced central expelling – the basic components of the development of a nuclear weapon – remain intact. Several analysts also warned before the war, verifying the serious damage to Iranian nuclear infrastructure is impossible without inspections on the ground or a large -scale invasion. In the absence of either of them, the Iranian nuclear program enters a more mysterious and unpredictable stage.

This ostrich is already formed. Just two days after US President Donald Trump announced the ceasefire, the Iranian parliament approved legislation to suspend cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. One of the legislators gave an explanation: “Why did our nuclear facility attacked and remained silent? Why did you give the green light for these measures? Today, they want to come again and to carry out selecting sites that were damaged and that you were unable to attack again.” In response, it appears that Tehran is ready to adopt the “nuclear mystery” strategy, similar to the situation, and Israel has long preserved itself, as it was overcome to clarify its nuclear capabilities and deny access to inspectors.

This is a dangerous new chapter. By attacking nuclear sites while continuing to request inspections and sanctions, the United States and Israel have undermined the logic of diplomacy not to spread. Ironically, their actions have done more to normalize the idea of ​​Iranian nuclear weapon more than any step that Tehran itself has taken.

While the nuclear result is unconfirmed, the capabilities of Iranian missiles have been clearly unambiguous. Its ballistic missiles succeeded in penetrating the Israeli and American air defenses, targeting military bases, intelligence vehicles, oil refineries, and research centers. Although Israeli censorship is limited by general reports, more than 41,000 compensation demands were submitted due to war damages.

The material and economic costs were also great. Ben Gurion Airport was closed, economic activity slowed down, and the capital flight increased. Missile defense systems such as Arrow and Thaad have been greatly exhausted, with estimates indicating that Israel used at least $ 500 million of Thaad. Former Trump counselor Steve Bannon, frankly, confirmed that the ceasefire was necessary to “save Israel”, who said he absorbed “brutal visits” and running the defenses. Trump himself admitted that Israel had been “very difficult”, and in the same journalistic appearance, he announced that China would be allowed to buy Iranian oil to help Iran “return to form.”

Iranian missile strikes also appeared intentionally. After an Israeli plane strike targeting the Iranian oil refinery in the South Pars Gas field, Iran responded by targeting a refinery in Haifa. After Israeli air strikes targeted Iranian research centers suspected of participating in nuclear activities, Iran has retaliated by hitting the Weizmann Institute of Science near Tel Aviv – a long suspected facility playing a role in nuclear research for Israel. Through these mutual attacks, Iran aims to indicate its ability to take revenge and enhance deterrence. It is worth noting that both sides refrained from targeting energy infrastructure after the initial exchange.

Outside the battlefield, the war had great social and political consequences within Iran. Instead of the collapse of the regime, this led to a clear increase in national feelings. For a long -standing society through repression and economic suffering, the war has become a unified moment – not around the Islamic Republic itself but about the idea of ​​defending the nation from foreign aggression.

The timing of this feeling of national solidarity. The war came just as Iran was working in nuclear negotiations with the Trump administration. Many Iranians were hoping that the recent elections of the reformist President Masoud Bezishian, who carried a campaign against diplomacy and economic recovery, would make meaningful progress. Instead, they saw that their country was bombing while searching for a compromise.

In response, a wide range of Iranian society-from artists and athletes to both religious and secular Iranians, including many G-were disposed of to support each other. Civilians have opened their homes to the displaced. The death of children, doctors, and ordinary people strengthened the random Israeli strikes, imagining that this war was not related to the liberation of the Iranians, but rather the dismantling of the country.

The long belief by many in Washington that the Iranian government does not need only that one external boost to fall has been completely distorted. Netanyahu launched this war to eliminate the strategic challenge that Iran poses. Instead, he revealed weaknesses in Israel, intensified Iranian nationalism, and failed to destroy the basic military and nuclear capabilities of Iran.

Ironically, the war may end with Iran’s regional and diplomatic position. While Trump and his envoy Steve Wings continue to insist that Iran should abandon all uranium enrichment, Tehran has been firm that fertilization is not customized. Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchchi publicly confirmed that Iran will never give up this right. At the same time, Trump suggested ready to reduce sanctions and even allow Chinese oil purchases, putting this as part of “great progress” towards regional calm.

These mixed signals reflect a deeper truth: Washington and Tran are increasingly focusing on stabilizing the situation instead of resolving the basic nuclear conflict. According to the CNN, the Trump administration was working in behind the scenes-some of which were held even during the height of the war-proposing up to $ 30 billion in investment for a civil nuclear program in Iran, and stopped the Iranian enrichment. These suggestions also include relief sanctions and access to frozen Iranian funds. While US officials assert that zero enrichment is a red line, payment for a new deal indicates a shift in priorities.

In practice, both sides may now be ready to accept strategic mystery. Instead of calling for the dismantling of the Iranian nuclear infrastructure that Trump already claims, the United States appears to be open to the elimination of escalation through diplomacy and economic incentives. For its part, Iran is satisfied to maintain its current capabilities in a mysterious way while avoiding more escalation. These mutual pragmatism may allow the removal of the escalation, but it leaves the basic nuclear issue without a more dangerous solution in the long run.