- The Media Line - https://themedialine.org -

Israeli Threats of War With Iran: A Psychological War or an Inevitable One?

Recently, Israeli military commentators have written numerous articles about a growing peril from Iran and its primary partner in the region, Hizbullah. These articles have discussed different scenarios of Hizbullah raiding Israel’s northern border and launching massive missile strikes, of up to 2,000 missiles each day, from a range of directions. Additionally, Israeli pundits have referenced intensive maneuvers and training of the Israeli forces in anticipation of a war that is believed to be only a matter of time due to Iran’s march toward a nuclear bomb. Some may interpret these recent articles and leaks concerning Israel’s readiness for war as an attempt to scare Iran and its proxies away from Israel’s borders. Others, however, may see them as a sign that war is only a matter of time. It could even be an attempt to accustom the Israeli public to the thought of war, in addition to preparing them both psychologically and operationally for it. Additionally, these stories may be sent as a message to the United States and other international players about the severity of the current situation and Israel’s willingness to go to war in order to protect its interests, particularly with respect to the current backchannel negotiations with Iran. Furthermore, it is possible that these stories and leaks were also created to raise Israel’s deterrence. It would be foolish to believe that any reporting related to the Israeli military, its plans, and training programs could have been published without prior authorization from Israeli authorities. Even the statements of both retired and active IDF officers must be vetted by the Israeli Military Censor beforehand. There is no exemption for anybody operating in the Israeli media, be they citizens or noncitizens. Therefore, what appears in these articles and reports may only be viewed as contributions, however minor, to an Israeli strategy that serves the country’s military and national interests. It is important to be cognizant of these facts when trying to read between the lines and interpret these stories objectively. Optimal analyses of these reports should take into account Israeli military doctrine, recent regional and international events, and any potential factors that could incite a war. According to Israeli military doctrine, there are two types of wars: preemptive and defensive. Preemptive wars are those in which Israel strikes first in order to preempt a perceived strategic threat or to thwart an adversary’s acquisition of a qualitative military edge. Examples here include the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. Defensive wars are those in which Israel is forced to fight in self-defense after it has been attacked. Examples include the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the 2006 war in Lebanon. Currently, it does not appear that Iran or Hizbullah is about to mount a military assault on Israel that would necessitate a major USA-Western intervention. This is evidenced by their lack of retaliation to Israel’s recent air raids in Syria. Iran has instead chosen to keep the conflict with Israel in the realm of a shadow war of espionage in the Persian Gulf and occasionally via armed groups in Gaza. As for the chance of Israel initiating an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, it is plausible, yet it poses numerous associated risks, not least of which is the prospect of military action without sufficient American support due to its entanglement in the Ukraine conflict, Chinese expansion, and a host of other matters. Israel is also aware that it cannot predict the duration of such a war. It is unlikely that such a war will be short-lived, as there is no guarantee that Iran will rationally cease its missile strikes after a brief period and not launch a full-blown campaign of attrition. Israel must consider its options carefully if it is faced with a protracted confrontation with Iran. Its recent history suggests that it must take decisive action before any conflict evolves to the point of requiring the use of its nuclear arsenal. It must consider all diplomatic options available to it, both publicly and through trusted backchannels, before embarking on any military adventure. Ultimately, it must determine whether it is prepared to modify its doctrine and come to terms with the reality of a potential nuclear Iran, or whether it will take the military initiative and attempt to prevent its foe from acquiring nuclear capabilities. In sum, it seems that these Israeli reports accompanying the maneuvers and training exercises are likely pieces of a larger psychological battle aimed at intimidating Iran and its proxies as well as persuading the Americans to enforce stricter terms on the Iranian regime. War is the last resort for Israel, given the associated risks of entering a military confrontation with an adversary of this caliber. Victory in armed conflict is no longer as attainable for Israel as it once was, due to the development of technology and the changing nature of warfare. Consequently, Israel faces difficult decisions that can influence its place and power within the region. —Riad Kahwaji (translated by Asaf Zilberfarb)