AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): As Trump's departure from the White House has dealt a severe blow to the aspirations of Israeli regime’s warmonger officials and even some of their likely-minded fellows in the reactionary Arab regimes, and while after Joe Biden assumption of power tense atmosphere in the Persian Gulf region gave place to calm, the chief of staff of the Israeli army General Aviv Kohavi said that he instructed his forces to prepare for possible action against Iran next year.
"I have instructed the army to prepare for a number of operational plans in addition to those already existing," Kohavi said, adding: “We are working on these programs and expanding them over the next year. Of course, the decision is up to the political leaders, but these plans are o n the table."
Although the Israeli leaders’ military action threats against Iran or the resistant groups in Lebanon and Palestine are made from time to time, due to the intensification of these threats in recent months, especially after the assassination of prominent Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, in which the Israelis were apparently involved, as well as airstrikes on the positions of the resistance forces in Syria, some questions present themselves: How far can this aggressive approach go? Can it drag Tel Aviv into a direct war against Tehran and its allies in the Axis of Resistance?
To answer these questions, the Israeli goals behind such threats should be taken into account.
Netanyahu’s perilous conditions
Emphasizing that the final decision ti implement anti-Iran plans were up to the politicians, the Israeli army chief sought to show that the preparation of the plans were his personal as well as the army’s decision, however coincidence of these threats with the deep political crisis that follows the dissolution of the Knesset— the fourth time in two years— and the tight race between Netanyahu and the rivals for victory in the March snap election signal that these threats were made for internal consumption.
Struggling with the internal division in the rightist camp and also the gaps brewing inside its body, Likud party is in a difficult situation and no longer able to form a stable coalition to form a cabinet, and the main reason for this crisis is Netanyahu himself. Over the past two years, Netanyahu has put all his energy into the political arena to escape various corruption cases and trial.
Now, however, with more rivals seeking to oust him from power, Netanyahu is focusing on the old policy of making the conditions security-dominant to cover up his and his relatives’ economic impotency and corruption. Last week, on the anniversary of the Holocaust, a claim according to which Nazi Germany massacred the Jews during WWI, Netanyahu tried to make himself the savior and shield of the Jews against the Iranian threat, though Iran has never spoken about the annihilation of the Jews as they are followers of one of the Abrahamic religions and thus his remarks are an obvious lie.
After the threat, Kohavi spoke of plans for military operations against Iran, which is completely in Netanyahu's interests. Such a scenario was so obvious that even Defense Minister Benny Gantz in the coalition government criticized the remarks of the army chief, saying that "Israel's security is in danger" in push to question Netanyahu’s performance and claims.
On the other hand, with Trump's departure, the Israelis are deeply concerned about the failure of the policy of maximum pressure against Tehran, as well as Biden's return to the nuclear deal with Iran, and seek to impose restriction of the Tehran’s defense, regional policies, and nuclear program using the American diplomacy. Israeli regime deems threatening Iran as a way to advance this demand, with the view that in any conflict with Tehran, Washington will be forced to intervene and provide military support to Tel Aviv.
Possible plans: limited and risky
Now, considering the goals the Israelis are pursuing from the recent threats, it is important to consider the nature of such plans, their priorities with regard to their consequences, and the capabilities of the two sides.
Tel Aviv has repeatedly talked about plans for direct attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. On the other hand, the assassination of nuclear scientists as well as prominent Iranian military and political figures and leaders and commanders of the Resistance camp, such as Lebanese Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is also on its agenda. Attacks on the Resistance bases and forces in Syria, Gaza, Lebanon, and Iraq have also been part of the Israeli plans in recent years. Another effort, especially after the normalization of relations with Iran's southern neighbors, is naturally creation of security threats near the Iranian borders using terrorist groups. The Israelis are not afraid that these plans would cause threats to their main ally the US and some of the Arab countries.
In the meantime, given that the Israeli leaders are well aware that a direct entry into the war with Iran will be an inevitable and dangerous consequence of any direct attack on the nuclear facilities, they do not even maneuver on it, even in slogans.
Therefore, the most important scenarios would be more assassinations and sabotage operations in Iran, as well as supporting terrorist groups, continuing attacks on Syrian territory, and escalating the tensions to influence Iranian relations with the Arab states and the US.
However, there is no consensus between the heads of the regime and the Israeli army on the tolerance threshold and the type of response Iran would give should it is attacked. Strengthening the security belt of the Resistance camp near the Israeli borders and tightening the encirclement around the occupied territories, arming the resistant groups with the new generations of advanced military equipment, especially missiles and drones, similar response to the occupied territories in case of an attack on Iran, and operations from Syria and Gaza against the Israelis are only part of the options fully at Tehran’s disposal for a crushing response in case of an Israeli military action. As Iranian military officials have repeatedly asserted, Iran’s finger is on trigger.
/129