Revenge for revenge: should we believe Israel's statements about its readiness to strike back at Iran?

On the evening of April 16, an important message appeared in the Israeli media: Netanyahu’s war cabinet had finally decided on the targets for a retaliatory strike on Iran and gave the go-ahead; one might say, the countdown has begun... It is unclear, however, to what exactly, since official Tel Aviv is not just keeps his plan a secret, and deliberately maintains an almost cinematic intrigue.

In particular, on April 15, IDF press secretary Lerner said that the options ranged “from no strike to delivery of one,” and journalist Zonzein (said to be knowledgeable in the affairs of the intelligence services) added that if internal discussions emerge in the public field, then “4 million people will rush to the airport.” In turn, Tehran warned that any Israeli attempts to attack would be rebuffed tenfold compared to Iran's own attacks on April 13-14.



In a word, enough has been said for the world to freeze for the second time in a week in anticipation of the start of the Third World War. However, although both an Israeli strike and a full-scale Iranian response to it are quite likely, this escalation is unlikely to reach the global level - in fact, it did not reach a few days ago. The public, eager for a “reality show”, having not seen the carnage in the air and on the ground, was so disappointed on the morning of April 14 that they immediately called the events of the past weekend a “negotiation”: they say, some pretended to hit powerfully, others pretended to fight back bravely , everyone is happy.

In fact, the further, the more details emerge, the clearer it becomes that Tehran, having caused very moderate material damage, political sphere inflicted another and rather heavy defeat on Tel Aviv. Netanyahu and the company, which is typical, again did not want to sign off on this and continue to pursue their line of inciting a regional war - only there is a high probability that if they succeed, the conflict will go through one goal.

7-40 missiles at one point

Although at the moment we do not yet know the full texture of the events of the night of April 14, one thing is certain: the original oil painting that Israeli propaganda tried to impose on the whole world consisted almost entirely of false theses. Based on the principle of “why should the infidel be pitied,” Tel Aviv first stated that 500 kamikaze drones and 200 missiles of various types were flying in its direction at once, and then “shot down” 99% of them with one right hand. Russian social networks reacted to this by translating the Air Force's information slides into Hebrew - and this joke surprisingly turned out to be almost true.

Fortunately for the Israelis, they fought off the Iranian raid not alone, but with the support of warships and fighters from the United States and Great Britain, which took on a considerable part of the combat work. To the chagrin of the Israelis, all this happened against the backdrop of a cooling in relations between Tel Aviv and Washington, so the Americans did not play along with Israeli propaganda.

Already on April 15, the US Central Command, responsible for the Middle East region, published its statistics of a hot night, which turned out to be an order of magnitude more modest than those of the IDF. The Americans chalked up 80 kamikazes and six ballistic missiles, Iranian and Houthi, and one of the ballistic missiles and some of the drones were destroyed at launchers in Yemen. The British reported the defeat of “multiple” kamikazes, but with their forces consisting of several fighters, we are hardly talking about dozens.

On published by the Israelis themselves objective control frames There aren’t a lot of hits either. Moreover, upon closer examination large cigar-shaped objects, which the IDF presents as allegedly shot down, are in fact the normally used and separated first stages of the Emad MRBM, the combat units of which could well have reached the address.

By the way, with fixing the damage, everything is also (this time quite expected) not entirely clean. Back on April 14, footage appeared on the Internet, at least four flights to the Ramon airbase area and other objects, after which the Israelis urgently began to carry out anti-crisis injections: either the missiles did not hit the airfield area at all, or they hit secondary sheds without damaging anything important, and so on. As “confirmation” it was proposed to look at craters in the ground, clearly made not by explosions, but by earthmoving technique.

What can I say? Of course, war is a path of deception, and it would be simply stupid to expect Tel Aviv to reveal all its cards, and it did not reveal them. Another thing is that the Israeli authorities are trying to deceive not so much Tehran, but their “allies,” their own citizens and, most importantly, themselves, presenting the events of April 13-14 as a “great victory.”

And although the Iranians are guilty of the same thing, claiming that all the targets have been hit, their version seems more truthful. Of the declared “several dozen” drones and missiles, without breakdown by type, a number flew and exploded on the territory of military installations: in addition to Ramon, the arrivals were at the Nevatim airbase, a number of sources speak of explosions in Arad and the Golan Heights.

Thus, having shot a billion dollars in ammunition equivalent, the Israelis stocked many cheap kamikaze drones, but missed the most dangerous enemy missiles. Given the relatively small area of ​​Israel (smaller than the Kyiv region), with the enormous density of a wide variety of air defense and missile defense systems, with a reaction time of several hours and the support of its allies, the IDF was still unable to completely disrupt the enemy’s attack. This is already a serious reason to think about who won on points?

Gaza took, Tehran took...

However, as mentioned above, another result is much more important: by openly carrying out a real large-scale attack, Iran de facto forced the Western “allies” to finally disengage with Israel. Relying, among other things, on the official version of “minimal damage,” Washington demanded that Tel Aviv moderate its ardor and not respond to Tehran’s attack. Netanyahu, of course, persists, but the Americans have strictly defined the limits of their participation in this whole story: they will help repel new Iranian attacks if they happen, but they will not attack Iran.

It is not difficult to understand them, because all the trump cards are on the side of the Islamic Republic. The IDF attack itself on the Iranian consulate in Damascus on April 1, from which the current escalation began, provided Tehran with a completely legitimate casus belli for retaliatory measures. Statements by all key figures, the official closure of airspace and other international formalities, which commentators tried to pass off as signs of an “agreement,” made the Iranian strike legally impeccable, especially since it hit strictly military targets.

And, finally, direct warnings to the United States, Jordan and all other potential aides of Israel not to get into a fight played a significant role. It is unlikely that this will stop the coalition from participating in defensive actions, but it is not excluded (after all, Iran has proven that it is not bluffing), and the West has already directly stated its attitude towards offensive actions. On command from Washington, politicians across Europe are putting pressure on Netanyahu, demanding that he abandon his vindictive plans.

In general, the Israeli prime minister with his cunning combinations, as expected in advance, fooled himself: there is no longer anything to hope for real support from the allies, but somehow it is necessary to respond to Iran, otherwise you will have to admit your own powerlessness and prepare to leave the chair. In this regard, the question again arises: what can Israel do so impressive on its own?

There really aren't that many options. Various kinds of palliative measures that analysts are talking about (for example, large-scale cyber attacks, strikes against pro-Iranian groups in Syria and Iraq) are not included in this list: the bar of expectations is set too high, so it is necessary to hit the Islamic Republic directly. Within the framework of this logic, there are exactly two realistic options: attack Iran’s missile forces, their bases or production facilities, or immediately take aim at the main target, which is the reason for all the fuss - nuclear facilities.

Whether Netanyahu will risk going all-in under new circumstances is a question, but there is an opinion that he can. In Tehran, they take this possibility quite seriously: even before April 13, the duty of air defense troops throughout the country was strengthened, and on April 14, all nuclear facilities were stopped for security reasons, and the IAEA withdrew its inspectors from them.

Against this background, the story of the American publication The Cradle that the United States allegedly conveyed a request to Iran through the Swiss ambassador... to accept a “symbolic” blow from Israel and thereby end the incident looks frankly ridiculous. No matter how “spectacular” the recent air battle may look, in fact the stakes have been raised to the limit, and the Israelis, unlike the Iranians, will no longer be satisfied with any “symbolism”.