Israeli Media Admits That Iran's Retaliatory Strikes On Israel Reined In Israel's War On Lebanon.

Iran Did Significant Damage To The Greater Israel Project.

Written By: Justin K.P.

Ynet, the Israeli Hebrew paper, has reported that Israel bombed Dahieh in South Beirut in an attempt to justify a renewed attack on Tehran, but the Trump administration- desperate for a deal- forced Tel Aviv to rein in it’s attack.

Israel’s plan- according to the paper- was to launch strikes on Dahieh to trigger an Iranian response on Northern Israel, which would then be used by Israel to sabotage U.S./Iran talks and to justify a renewed campaign targeting Tehran.

The Israeli plan, according to the report, was:

A source familiar with the details claims that as early as last Thursday, Israel really wanted to bomb Tehran, perhaps as a last-ditch attempt to thwart the bad agreement that was emerging with Iran. Trump pressed for it not to happen, and the attack was indeed called off. Israel saw Hezbollah’s firing into the Galilee as an opportunity to put the plan back on the table, and thought of a domino effect: Israel would attack Dahiyya, Iran, which is trying to create an equation, would attack with missiles - and Israel would have justification to attack. In Jerusalem, they thought that this would be an opportunity to settle scores with the Iranians and strike infrastructure and energy targets, which would accelerate the overthrow of the regime.

But Trump, desperate to make a deal to end the losing war in Iran, reigned in these Israeli plans, according to the report.

The report added, “ in the early hours of the morning (US time), when it became clear in Washington that Israel was preparing for another, much more significant attack on Iran, the picture changed. According to the sources, Trump understood that Israel might take advantage of the Iranian firing and the developments in Lebanon to expand the campaign. A source familiar with the details said that there was concern in the White House that Netanyahu was, in effect, trying to thwart the possibility of reaching an agreement with Iran by creating a new security reality”.

It added:

At that point, Trump called Netanyahu According to the sources, the conversation was very forceful. The American president made it clear to the prime minister that if Israel launches a broad attack on Iran, it will be left alone. Netanyahu, on the other hand, argued that Israel must respond after the Iranian shooting, and that failure to respond would harm deterrence. Trump understood the Israeli need to respond, but demanded that the response be limited, measured - and not one that would launch a new campaign against Tehran.

Trump’s desperation to make a deal with Iran made him call off a planned escalated Israeli military campaign against Iran, according to the report.

It noted:

Plans for a large-scale attack had already been prepared in Israel. According to Israeli sources, it was an attack in which dozens of fighter jets were supposed to participate against a series of targets throughout Iran. However, after the conversation with Trump, Netanyahu informed the security establishment that the plans should be stopped. The IDF canceled the attacks that were planned to continue throughout the day and night, and in fact, the round against Iran was stopped long before it was exhausted from Israel’s perspective.

This- Ynet admitted- was a major strategic victory for Iran and against the Greater Israel project.

“The Iranians understood that Trump was more interested in preventing regional deterioration and preserving the possibility of reaching an agreement, so in the morning hours (US time) they announced that they were ready to stop the military operations. This announcement provided Trump with the diplomatic window he needed to pressure Netanyahu to stop the attacks and close the incident before it got out of control. Only after long hours of silence, Netanyahu bothered to release a short recorded video … trying to build a narrative of victory - while the reality is the opposite,” the report noted.

Furthermore, as the paper noted, Israel will now have to worry about an Iranian response to the next potential attack on Dahieh, knowing that the U.S. will now rein in an Israeli attack on Tehran, noting:

Israel says that ‘the campaign in Lebanon will continue,’ and that the IDF will continue to operate according to the equation that firing at northern settlements will be responded to with an attack on Dahiyeh. But even on this issue, an open question remains: Will Israel really be able to continue operating in Lebanon with the same intensity, if every time the Iranians try to connect the arenas, Trump intervenes to prevent a broader escalation?

In this sense, Iran may not have achieved a dramatic military achievement, but it has managed to pose a complex political test to Israel: whether any Israeli attack on Dahiyya or southern Lebanon could trigger an Iranian response, which would trigger American intervention and reduce Jerusalem’s scope for action. This is precisely the equation that Israel tried to prevent - and now it may become the central challenge of the coming rounds.

Former Israeli intelligence official Danny Sitrinowicz admitted to the paper that, “Israel is now faced with a difficult dilemma: respond and risk a frontal confrontation with the US president, or refrain from responding and allow Iran to establish a new equation that will significantly reduce Israel’s freedom of action” in Lebanon.

Analyst Trita Parsi noted that Iran’s response to Israel takes away Israel’s ability to attack Lebanon with impunity, noting that “Israeli decision-makers will now have to factor in a cost that did not previously exist— the likelihood of a direct Iranian response against Israel. For decades, Israel enjoyed near-complete freedom of maneuver in much of the region. It could bomb targets in Lebanon at will without facing meaningful costs imposed by third parties. That assumption may no longer hold.”

“If Israel now has to weigh the prospect of direct Iranian retaliation before striking Lebanon, then something important has changed,” Parsi noted.

Israel thought that it could trigger a renewed Israeli/American war on Iran through bombing Dahieh, but the U.S. remained desperate for a deal, knowing Iran has the upper hand, and now Israel has lost its impunity to bomb Lebanon, having to now worry about the possibility of an Iranian response.

Iran, no doubt, holds the upper hand against the U.S. and Israel.

---

Note to readers: The Dissident is a reader-supported outlet. If you liked this article, consider becoming a paid subscriber.