Iran said its rocket and missile attacks were “cautious and moderate” and that it could have launched a larger attack on Israel, but did not choose to do so. Iran’s supporters in Europe and the United States seem to agree, spending much of last week advising Israel to show restraint and forego retaliation. Neither of them mentions that had the Iranian attack been successful, it would have been considered an existential threat and Israel would have taken massive retaliation against Iran and its proxies. .
It is unclear whether out of fear of Iran or the belief that Iran is or could be a responsible actor in the region, but all advocate for the appeasement of the aggressor.
Israel took a different decision and carried out a small attack on an air base in Isfahan, Iran. Tehran’s government has denied for some time that there was an Israeli attack, and there has been no word yet on any damage the airbase may have sustained.
To carry out this attack, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) destroyed key radars that could track Israeli aircraft and missiles in Syria. The refueling aircraft was launched to demonstrate that multiple sorties could have been launched against selected targets inside Iran, but were not carried out. And Iran’s air defense system, consisting mainly of Russian S-300s and indigenous systems, does not appear to have caused any damage to the IAF.
When Iran attacked Israel, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), which directs the U.S. sea, air, and land defenses, assisted Israel by interdicting Iranian drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. Jordan also supported it, as did Saudi Arabia.
The United States stood by as Israel retaliated. The Pentagon claims it was informed of the attack at the last minute, but it is impossible for Israeli aircraft to operate against Iran without passing through U.S. military bases and ships deployed in the region. It should have been.This means that the United States Deliberately Deleted itself.
This is bad news, but not surprising. While President Biden has often claimed to support Israel, he has explicitly threatened to leave Israel alone with even a limited attack to counter a major attack by Iran. Israel made this choice fully aware of America’s limitations.
This has implications for the future.
For more than two decades, U.S. presidents have said the United States would act to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. These pledges were always interpreted as blanket commitments, with the United States committing to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, either by diplomatic or military means.
After Iran’s attack on Israel, Ahmad Haqtarab, head of Iran’s nuclear protection and security forces, said: Tehran may reconsider It has strengthened its longstanding “doctrine and nuclear policy” and is moving away from its announced position of “prohibiting nuclear weapons.” This could be Israel’s fault, he said.
This would also be a lie. Years of empirical evidence have shown that Iran is working towards perfecting a nuclear bomb and nuclear delivery system. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) shielded Iran, saying there was no clear intelligence. But this week, Iran’s position could change, with IAEA Director Rafael Grossi admitting that Iran could build nuclear weapons.within a few months”
The United States has made no public statement about Iran’s growing nuclear threat or about leaked reports that Iran plans to use radioactive weapons (dirty bombs) in another attack on Israel “next time.”
For historical accuracy, it should be noted that the IAEA said the same about Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor. Menachem Begin wisely ordered the reactor’s destruction in 1981. The US did not support Israel on this either.
President Biden has been more active in supporting Iran than any other US president by lifting sanctions against Iran and its proxies. He failed to veto the expiration of U.N. sanctions against Iran’s ballistic missile program. He will waive billions of dollars worth of sanctions on Iranian oil deliveries to China and other countries. Ignoring illegal U.S.-made parts in Iranian drones used in Ukraine. and spending billions of dollars on anti-Israel, anti-American regimes. The president has not explained why the United States has taken so many actions that benefit regimes that are sanctioned for terrorist activities at various levels.
Doing so would undermine U.S. credibility in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf region, leading to the conclusion that America’s commitment to protect against Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons remains in serious doubt.
Protecting a mullah-led regime is a very dangerous policy that could easily backfire, a fact that should not be forgotten by America’s allies and friends in the region and further afield.
The American people should hold the White House and State Department to account and demand policy changes.
It’s urgent.
Stephen Brien is a former senior Pentagon official. Shoshana Bryan is a senior she-director at the Jewish Policy Center and editor of the quarterly magazine inFOCUS.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or our partnership, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
