Burcu Ozcelik
The region’s powers worry that an Israeli victory over Iran may come at the cost of stability. A negotiated solution to Iran’s nuclear program remains the best bet.
Pandora’s box has been cast wide open with Israel’s air campaign against Iran—an escalation that will reshape strategic alliances and the balance of power in the Middle East. By targeting senior IRGC leadership and nuclear infrastructure deep inside Iranian territory, “Operation Rising Lion” has forcefully challenged assumptions about Iran’s deterrence posture.
A coordinated blend of Israeli HUMINT, SIGINT, and cyber operations has left Iran boxed in, with fewer viable options. Iran’s retaliatory strikes on Israel have inflicted tactical damage but fell short of the scale Tehran has long threatened. For a state that has spent years constructing a deterrence architecture built on the doctrine of forward defense via regional proxy networks and missile threats, the limited response is telling. It signals one of two things: either Iran is exercising calculated restraint, or it is running up against the limits of its military reach relative to Israeli air dominance and potential US escalation in the Gulf.
Either way, and if only through indirect back-channels, in the span of a few short days, Iran has signaled that it wants to talk. The question has been whether Tehran is prepared to make deep concessions on its nuclear program to deter further Israeli strikes and prevent direct US intervention.
There was always a risk that the maximalist US demands for complete dismantling of the enrichment program would derail the pursuit of an agreement. Tehran appears to have overestimated American flexibility in negotiations and underestimated Israel’s military preparedness and risk appetite. Until the final hours before the operation launched on June 13, Tehran likely continued to view the US military buildup and threats of force as psychological pressure tactics.
No comments:
Post a Comment