The Iranian attack that exposed the Zionist army

Iran threatened the Zionist state and vowed to respond to the bombing of its embassy in Syria and the killing of 16 people, including a senior commander in the Revolutionary Guards Quds Force and seven other officers on 1 April. The response came on the night of 14 April when 185 drones were launched, along with 36 cruise missiles, and 110 surface-to-surface missiles crossed the airspace of Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon towards Israeli targets in an attack that lasted about five hours.

The night that the whole world had been waiting for and holding its breath for in fear of an explosion in the region that would flip the balances and change the international equations drawn up decades ago has ended, but as the proverb goes “The mountain laboured and brought forth a mouse.” This limited operation did not result in significant losses, neither in lives nor in facilities. It was a calculated operation of which the US was notified 72 hours in advance. Moreover, starting the attack with drones before launching missiles allowed the Zionist state to prepare itself as the drones needed several hours to reach their targets. US President Joe Biden announced the date, size and scope of the attack, which does not happen in wars, thus giving the Israelis and their allies the opportunity to prepare well. Even before the missiles and drones reached occupied Palestine, Iran’s mission to the UN announced that this was the end of the Iranian response.

The Iranians thought that this would be a deterrent strike and that the Israelis would swallow the attack that was intercepted with the help of the American, British and French armies, along with other countries. However, it seems that under the pressure of continuous failure and ineffectiveness in Gaza, the Zionist side does not agree. The leaders of the Zionist entity are yelling about the need to respond and take revenge to restore the status and prestige lost since the Al-Qassam attack on 7 October.

Read: Iran’s historic attack was rooted in Palestine’s freedom struggle

The bottom line is that the response did not go beyond what was planned according to the established precedents between the parties to the game, similar to Iran’s response to the killing of Qassem Soleimani. At the time, Tehran informed the Iraqi prime minister 24 hours before the strike due to the fact that the US base that Tehran planned to strike was located in Iraq, and Baghdad informed the US. The base that was planned to be attacked was evacuated and the strike left no victims. Hence the result of the Iranian strike was that everyone wins when it ends at this limit and does not expand, as Iran responded to the Zionist state with minimal losses and the US administration protected it.

In this context, I must stress that neither Iran, nor the US or the Zionist entity wants a comprehensive attack, and that everyone has agreed not to expand the scope of the war currently taking place in Gaza. Therefore, Iran conveyed its message about the expected strike, explaining that it is limited and directed at the military sites used by the aircraft that bombed its consulate in Damascus.

In spite of its limited scope, the attack is considered a decisive strategic event that may change the equations that preceded it. At its heart, it indicated that the Zionist entity’s violation of the rules of engagement, which occurred in its bombing of the consulate in Damascus, will lead to an equivalent response. Meaning that Iran has presented a new equation of terror, the danger of which is borne by the Zionist entity if it violates it or tries to change it by raising the level of conflict and targeting Tehran directly.

The Israeli strike on Iran took place in the Syrian capital, Damascus, while the Iranian response came for the first time deep inside Israel, which is a first. This time, the Iranian response was direct and was not through its proxies in the region. Despite the minimal losses suffered by the Zionist entity, this strike was humiliating to the occupation, once again highlighting its fragility and the weakness of its army, which has been demonstrated by the resistance in Gaza over the course of the past seven months. The Iranian attack revealed, for the second time, the Zionist army’s inability to confront it alone, and that had it not been for the American, British and French armies deployed in Iraq, Syria and Jordan, the Zionist entity would have been paralysed. What if the attack involved launching thousands of missiles and drones suddenly? What if they used hypersonic missiles?

However, on the other hand, this limited strike restored the momentum of Western sympathy and strong American and Western material support for the Zionist entity, which could reflect negatively on the Palestinians, whether in Gaza, which has entered its seventh month of fierce war against it and the genocide against its population, or in the West Bank, which is suffering from the escalation of ethnic cleansing at the hands of settlers supported by the occupation army, its racist government and its Prime Minister, Netanyahu, who was given the kiss of life after his defeat in Gaza.

Operation Al-Aqsa Flood dropped the Zionist entity’s false mask of power which it tried to portray to frighten the countries of the region, but the Iranian attack exposed its helpless army.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.