Alwaght- Four days after the historical IRGC missile and drone strikes deep into the Israeli regime, the attack continues to grab headlines on regional and international media, and given the possibility of Israeli response, analysts still keep shedding light on the aspects of this landmark move. Alwaght has talked to West Asia affairs expert Alireza Taghavi Nia to bring in spotlight the impacts and possibilities related to the Operation True Promise on the ground and in diplomacy.
Israel lost its deterrence in the eyes of the public opinion
Mr Taghavi Nia held that the most import Israeli loss after Operation True Promise is losing the deterrence power in the eyes of the public opinion, adding that until recently, Israel was claiming that it enjoys power invincible by others, but Iran directly attacked a regime holding nuclear arms, proving that this regime has failed to provide security to the settlers despite all of its much-vaunted military power and nuclear arms. The Israeli citizens suppose that this could happen again and think that they and their children have no future in the occupied territories and should return where they came from.
Tipping the balance of terror in favor of Iran
Mr Taghavi Nia also commented on the repercussions of Operation True Promise for the security equation and regional security, adding that there was a wrong supposition in the mind of Israeli leaders that they can strike anywhere without fearing the consequences. For example, Israel struck Iraq's nuclear reactors in 1981, Syria’s nuclear facilities in 2007, and targets in Sudan and Tunisia. Actually, the Israeli regime had supposed a safe margin for itself after its attacks on other counties, but Iran's reaction was so quick and resolute that it awakened up Tel Aviv from a deep sleep, making it understand that Islamic Republic is a different story and it should not make a mistake about Tehran. With the slap it received, this regime understood that it is not whatever-doer and it cannot do whatever it wishes without fearing the consequences.
The political expert maintained that he is now sure that from now on, any attacks on the Iranian military advisors in a third state will be responded to and Israeli national security will be jeopardized, and that it should review its actions against the Islamic Republic and should depart from the thought that it can hit anywhere any time without being hit back. He said he thinks that this operation has significantly changed the balance of terror in favor of the Islamic Republic of Iran because Iran displayed both its weapons and offensive intentions and realized its threats. Tehran used to threaten but was not in a position to realize them, but after this, Iran's threats are valid and the world knows that Iran also attacked and reacted to Israel which has nuclear weapons. From now on, many of the reckless neighbors will fear Iran.
Eliminating toxic anti-Iranian propaganda in Arab world
Asked what was the reflection of the Iranian operation in the Arab public opinion, Mr Taghavi Nia held that the recent Iranian attack has substantially improved the Islamic Republic’s position in the Arab world because for decades there was a propaganda that Iran is not really an enemy to Israel and that it instrumentalizes claims of enmity to Tel Aviv to advance its plans for expansion of Shiite faith in the Muslim world. Such unfounded claims were always being propagated across the region and Muslim world. This comes while after Israel waged war on Gaza, Iran was among the finite sides that practically backed the Palestinian resistance factions.
Mr Taghavi Nia went on that the IRGC missile operation actually validated the Iranian strategy to eliminate the Israeli occupation, adding that the Arab public opinion saw that Iran is serious in its hostility to the Israeli regime and its recent attack was beyond empty slogans. The Arab public witnessed that Iran both has advanced weapons and can realize its threat to punish Tel Aviv. This boosted Iranian position and popularity and highlighted the treason of the most hated Arab rulers who are turning a blind eye to the Israeli crimes in Gaza and desecration of the holy Muslim sites in Palestine.
The regional affairs expert further maintained that after Jordan's recent support to Israel against Iranian strikes, he saw how tough the Arab users of social media attacked the Jordanian king, calling him a "traitor" and thanking Iran for its solidarity with the Palestinian cause. He held that he thinks that in addition to the deterrence that this attack built for Iran, it bolstered Iranian position in the Arab world in terms of public diplomacy.
Diplomacy backed the field
Mr Taghavi Nia further held that in the Security Council meeting, two world powers with veto right, Russia and China, supported Iranian right to strike back and this is an important issue. He added that this actually shows the world is moving to a bipolar order. It can be strongly said that a new front in the face of the West has emerged. This new front consists of the three powers of Iran, Russia, and China. These three are striving to challenge the West's hegemony and destroy the order the West established after collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. He said he thinks that the Islamic Republic’s diplomacy left a positive influence on the UNSC and the positions of countries.
Meaningful message to the West
Referring to the fact that in case of war in the region the Western interests will be jeopardized, Mr Taghavi Nia said that the West certainly does not want full-scale war with Iran for a variety of reasons. Any conflict with Iran at any scale will mean absolutely losing access to the Persian Gulf oil. This is not a slogan, he said, adding that Iran by seizing the Israeli ship proved that it can close down the Strait of Hormuz any time it wishes. The West should learn from the Bab-el-Mandeb developments. The US is incapable of reopening this strait to the Israeli ships and even protect its security after several months amid Yemen's ban on Israeli ships and ports in solidarity with Gaza. So, it certainly cannot secure flow of oil to the world markets should a massive war breaks out with Iran. It should be said that the regional and Western countries do not want a large-scale confrontation between Iran and the Israeli regime and will certainly force Israel to show self-restraint since they know that any clash in the region can leave irreparable consequences on the regional equations and energy flow. With the West already fighting in Ukraine and energy exports from Russia are restrained, it is unlikely that the Western countries openly and practically support Tel Aviv for a massive war.
