Strategic Confusion in Israel: Do Washington and Tel Aviv Have a Clear Plan for the War on Iran?

A state of anxiety is escalating within political and media circles in Israel regarding the absence of a clear strategic plan for the ongoing war against Iran. Observers indicate that the American-Israeli alliance appears to be moving without a long-term vision, raising questions about the ultimate goals of this extensive military confrontation.

Hebrew press sources revealed that US President Donald Trump has begun consulting with close media figures to find ways to end the war, a step that reflects wavering positions. Analysts believe that Trump tends to change his declared goals daily, having shifted from talking about regime change to proposing contradictory political and military objectives.

In an analysis published by Haaretz, experts warned that the American leadership is fighting the war without a pre-planned strategy, relying on instantaneous reactions instead of established strategies. This behavior places Israel in a complex position, especially with the discovery that direct confrontation with Tehran is more complicated than previously expected.

Military analyst Avi Sakharov, for his part, warned that Tehran seeks to emerge from this war capable of standing, drawing inspiration from the attrition tactics of its allies in the region. He explained that the Iranian strategy relies on pressuring Washington by targeting its interests and the Gulf states, which requires Israeli caution against promises of quick victory.

On the ground operations front, there appears to be a trend towards sowing chaos within Iran by targeting government and civilian institutions, including the Tehran municipality and leadership centers in Qom. These strikes aim to incite the Iranian street to revolt against the regime, coinciding with Israeli threats to assassinate any alternative leadership that emerges in the future.

In a related context, former ministers in the occupation government called for the necessity of escalating military targeting to encourage ethnic minorities within Iran to engage in armed rebellion. They believe that Israel may miss a historic opportunity if it fails to overthrow the current regime during this direct and unprecedented confrontation.

However, reserve generals downplayed the realism of betting on a minority revolution, emphasizing that the Iranian regime still possesses hundreds of thousands of loyal soldiers capable of protecting it. They cited the historical failure to change regimes in Gaza and Lebanon, warning against being drawn into illusions not supported by facts on the ground.

Former military leaders suggested the necessity of deepening air strikes to cripple Iran's capabilities for many years, instead of betting on immediate regime collapse. They stressed the importance of keeping channels for negotiation with any remaining leadership, warning that alternatives could sometimes be more dangerous and hostile towards Israel.

Regarding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position, he appears more cautious in his public statements compared to Trump, focusing on slogans of 'empowering the Iranian people.' Netanyahu tries to distance himself from accusations of luring the United States into a regional war, while focusing on post-war gains such as normalization with Saudi Arabia.

Hebrew newspaper editorials warned against the illusion of achieving regional peace without resolving the Palestinian issue, emphasizing that removing the Iranian threat must be followed by steps to end the occupation. They considered that the cost of continuing the conflict has become too high, and that the time has come to move from the logic of regional wars to building a comprehensive and real peace.

On the defensive level, sources revealed that the Israeli cabinet is studying the possibility of providing technical and military support to American defense systems located in the Arabian Gulf region. This step comes within the framework of protecting common interests and confronting any Iranian attacks that may target neighboring Arab countries.

As for the northern front, the past hours witnessed a significant escalation with rockets and drones launched from Lebanon towards central Israel. Despite the decrease in the intensity of direct Iranian rocket barrages, the Lebanese front is still ablaze amidst Israeli demands for a ground operation to eliminate Hezbollah's capabilities.

A discussion is underway within the security establishment on how to deal with the Lebanese government and the Lebanese army in light of the confrontation with Hezbollah. While some call for striking infrastructure, others see the need to pressure the Lebanese government while avoiding the occupation of a permanent security strip in the south to avoid getting bogged down in the Lebanese quagmire again.

In conclusion of the developments, the commander of the Northern Command in the occupation army sent strongly worded threats, considering that Hezbollah committed a strategic mistake by joining the battle. The military official vowed to continue harsh strikes that will affect all Lebanese areas from Tyre to Beirut, emphasizing that operations will not stop until military objectives are achieved.

We must approach promises of 'absolute victory' with skepticism this time too in confronting Tehran.