The Middle East entered
an unknown dimension
last night when Israel hit a key point in Iran with its missiles to return the attack it had received on its territory on Saturday.
This new scenario, which confronts these former enemies
face to face for the first time in their own territories
, is the door to a crisis of unforeseeable consequences that on its worst scale would announce a war involving the allied powers on each side.
Only one piece of information alleviates that ominous vision. Israel's blow
consisted of one or two missiles,
according to preliminary information, which defeated the ancient anti-aircraft system of the Persian power in a strategic military region such as Isfahan where projectiles are manufactured and there is an important military base.
These weaknesses were absolutely exposed, unlike what happened on Saturday, when the battery of more than three hundred projectiles of the Persian power was almost entirely destroyed by an
extraordinary shield
that united Israel with the United States and France. , Great Britain and Jordan..
One of the reasons why Iran has avoided a hand-to-hand clash with Israel throughout history is seen in the non-comparable levels that this exchange reveals. Now this duel
shows the magnitudes of each side in a stained glass window
. It is possible that for this reason the official Iranian press denied the existence of any bombing as “pure Western propaganda” at the time it occurred. Possible anticipation that there would be no reply to this reply.
Iran's direct attack against Israel last Saturday was the central event that brought down the unstable shelf in the Middle East, it does not matter if Tehran reduced its effectiveness. That movement
elevated the Middle East crisis
to a dimension that the Persian autocracy itself had tried to avoid since the beginning of the current war in Gaza. It was a textbook error that would demonstrate a significant failure in the decision-making system and even in the leadership it seeks in its space of influence.
Tehran rightly protests when it denounces that the cycle of direct attacks was inaugurated by Israel when on April 1 it razed its consulate in Damascus, a building that is technically Iranian territory. The justification for this action -- which
generated first disbelief and then anger in the White House
-- is controversial.
It happened the same day that the Israeli army shocked the world with
the inexplicable bombing of the team from the World Central Kitchen organization
, which was traveling in a caravan in Gaza on a route agreed upon with the military to deliver food and medicine.
The coup in its Syrian headquarters put pressure on Iran to somehow be able to show deterrence to the aggressor and authority to its allies.
That movement was what Israel was waiting for
. And that possibly caused it. Iran did not take the context into account.
The type of operation chosen for the replication seemed to be the intermediate conclusion between extremes. A barrage of two types of missiles and drones was chosen, armed with weapons that would allow their safe neutralization, as actually occurred. Although the US denies it,
there were reports from Turkey, Iraq and Jordan anticipating, on behalf of Iran
, the limited nature of the response.
But if Tehran intended to impress with this theatrics and close the matter
, the result fell far short of its goals
. A central dimension of these novelties has been that impressive impregnable defense structure that was exhibited that day, by land, sea and air.
Air for Netanyahu
The hubbub of threats of
attacks on Israeli atomic plants
that Tehran made on Thursday and the messages from its Foreign Ministry to Washington warning that a major conflagration is not sought, emerge from the impotence that that scene indicates.
Iran's military move also provided crucial help to
Netanyahu's deteriorating image.
Today it is possible to find among Israelis on the plain, even among those who marched to demand the resignation of the controversial president, who point out that this time he did the right things.
It is the return of
Mr. Security
, the
“security man,”
the presumptuous nickname given to himself by the right-wing leader, whose star had gone out with the disasters of the war in Gaza and the expansionist and racist follies of his ultranationalist allies. Image that also improved internationally due to the immediate solidarity that the bombing aroused.
With this panorama,
a more in-depth analysis would surely have convinced Iran to limit the response
, perhaps limiting it to the hijacking of the Israeli capital container ship that its commandos took over on Saturday morning. That episode was the most important news of those hours, interpreted by some analysts as a response precisely to the attack on the embassy.
The failures in the Iranian decision-making system may be confirming the decline of the Islamic Revolution challenged by a chronic social crisis and nationalist detachment in the population. But, also, due to a superposition of contradictory interests to protect. Tehran had avoided sacrificing itself to the aid of its acolyte Hamas after the terrorist attack against Israel on October 7, to a certain extent because
important international sanctions against its missile structure expired that same month.
So, beyond the warlike rhetoric, it sought to avoid the reimposition of penalties that would reduce its military capacity and commercial power. Those have just been confirmed again by the US and the UK.
Iran also looks at the war in Ukraine on the assumption that Kiev will soon fall,
which will strengthen the axis it is building together with Russia and China
, a considerable objective in the face of the regional dispute with Israel that should not escape its format.
Regarding the historical events of October 7, it is worth remembering that it was never clear that the satrapy of the Ayatollahs
had prior knowledge
of the attack carried out by the faction of the ultra-Islamic organization in Gaza that is supposed to be part of its order. It means, if so, absence of the capacity to control one's own territory. A defect that helps to understand the decision failures we see now.
These are all data that show weaknesses. The Iranian government is living with a worsening internal crisis that not long ago triggered protest mobilizations that
ended with hundreds of deaths and put the continuity of the regime at risk.
They were triggered by the murder of a girl at the hands of the police for allegedly wearing the veil incorrectly over her hair.
This repression goes beyond the cultural issue. It uses these symbols to muzzle a mostly young population frustrated and challenged by an inflation of 40% annually,
severe employment problems, widespread corruption
and exhausted by the medieval restraints imposed by the system.
It is illustrative that in these days of enormous tension, anonymous posters and graffiti have appeared in Tehran telling Israelis that
if they attack, they should start with the offices of the government and the supreme leader
. They are painted or written by people who have long differentiated the legendary Iran from the Islamic Republic created in 1979.
© Copyright Clarín 2024