Research sources at the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies reported that Israel is striving to prolong the military confrontation with Iran, with the aim of achieving an undeclared strategic goal of undermining the pillars of the Iranian regime and overthrowing it. This vision is based on a firm Israeli conviction that Tehran will not abandon its nuclear ambitions as long as the current regime is in power, which makes a radical change in the structure of power a security necessity from Tel Aviv's perspective.
A recent position paper considered that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu exploited major political shifts, starting from the repercussions of the 'Al-Aqsa Flood' operation to Donald Trump's return to the White House, to implement plans that had been prepared for decades. Through this escalation, Netanyahu aims to ensure Israel's monopoly on nuclear power in the region and prevent the emergence of any regional competitor capable of threatening its military superiority.
The sources indicate that Israeli incitement against Iran is not new, but rather an extension of a historical policy that began with the destruction of the Iraqi 'Tammuz' reactor in 1981 and the Syrian 'Al-Kibar' reactor in 2007. Israel is currently acting as a key driver of international efforts aimed at isolating Tehran and imposing maximum sanctions on it, in an attempt to exhaust it internally before delivering devastating blows to its infrastructure.
Israeli ambitions go beyond merely weakening military capabilities, reaching the point of desiring to plunge Iran into a state of comprehensive chaos or civil war. Tel Aviv is betting on stirring separatist tendencies among ethnic minorities, who constitute about half of the population, with the aim of dismantling the Iranian state into small states or warring cantons, thereby ending its role as a unified regional power.
For its part, the Israeli military establishment adopts an approach that supports the use of excessive force to weaken Iran, but at the same time recognizes the complexities of overthrowing the regime. Military sources believe that achieving this goal requires a large-scale air campaign targeting the country's economic nerve, including oil and gas facilities and electricity grids, which faces clear reservations from the current US administration.
The divergence between Washington and Tel Aviv is evident in the energy file; the Trump administration fears that intensive strikes on Iranian oil facilities could lead to Tehran's production being removed from global markets. This scenario could cause sharp jumps in international energy prices, which Washington seeks to avoid at all costs to maintain global economic stability and its internal interests.
Furthermore, Trump's political vision differs from Netanyahu's orientations regarding the future of governance in Tehran. While Israel pushes for the complete collapse of the regime, the US administration prefers to bring about a change in the regime's behavior and policies while keeping state institutions intact, in order to avoid a security vacuum that could lead to uncontrolled chaos in a strategic region.
In a parallel context, the Iranian regime faces these plans amid an imbalance of power not in its favor, especially with the absence of an international ally from the great powers capable of providing sufficient protection or logistical support to withstand. These developments come at a time when political memory recalls Iran's previous positions, such as its support for the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and its direct intervention in the Syrian crisis.
On the popular and media level, the military escalation has led to the emergence of intellectual battles and sharp sectarian alignments that have transcended the political dimensions of the event. Observers warn that the transformation of the conflict into a 'Sunni-Shiite' polarization serves Israeli goals in fragmenting the region, calling on elites and intellectuals to reorient the compass towards what they describe as the 'real existential enemy'.
In conclusion, analysts believe that the results of this conflict will redraw the map of the Middle East for decades to come. While Israel seeks to definitively resolve its conflict with the 'Iranian project', American calculations and field complexities remain an obstacle to achieving full Israeli ambitions, which places the region before open scenarios ranging from comprehensive explosion to forced settlements.
Israel has developed a conviction that the Iranian regime will not abandon its nuclear project, and that the only way to put an end to it is to overthrow the regime itself.
شارك برأيك
Between overthrowing the regime and changing its behavior.. The divergence of Israeli and American goals in the aggression against Iran