US expert: Iran and Israel are really at war and are likely to become more violent

Washington

- An American expert attributed the absence of a direct armed conflict between Israel and Iran so far, and this is due to the geographical distance and the absence of borders between the two parties, while the relations between the two countries are witnessing a continuous escalation, exacerbated by the stalemate and the suspension of the Vienna negotiations, with Iran continuing to advance its nuclear program as well as The latest reports from the International Atomic Energy Organization indicate.

In light of this, David de Roche - a former military commander and currently assistant professor at the Center for Near East and South Asia Strategic Studies at the National Defense University of the US Pentagon - spoke to Al Jazeera Net about the possibility of military operations between Israel and Iran.

During his 30-year history at the Department of Defense, de Roach served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the US Special Operations Command, as well as in conventional and special operations forces deployed in the Middle East, Europe, and Afghanistan.

De Roche held several positions in the Office of the US Secretary of Defense for Political Affairs, including Director of the Gulf and Arabian Peninsula Office, Director of Communications between the Ministry of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, and Director of NATO Operations.

Dialog text:

David de Roche, Professor of Security Studies at the National Defense University and a former US military official (communication sites)

There has been an ongoing low-level proxy war between Iran and Israel for decades.

Iran usually attacks easy Jewish (not necessarily Israeli) targets, such as the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, while Israel attacks military targets and leaders inside Iran.

With the expansion of the war in Syria, Israel targeted the Iranian military presence in Syria, while Iran sought to empower various proxies such as the Lebanese Hezbollah, not only by providing weapons, especially missiles, but also by providing them with the means to manufacture such weapons, and this was more evident with Drones.

Most recently, Israel attacked an Iranian drone facility inside Iran, prompting Iran to attack a facility in Iraqi Kurdistan that it described as an Israeli spy center.

Recently, we are witnessing more attacks on senior military officers and security officials in Iran, as well as major attacks on targets in Syria such as Damascus International Airport.

It seems that Iran feels that it must respond out of security calculations as well as out of preserving its image.

Given the increasing role of the IRGC in various Iranian sectors, and with the increasing corruption in Iran linked to the expansion of IRGC's influence, significant security failures call into question the legitimacy of the Iranian regime.

So the current escalation is likely to continue and become more violent.

They are already at war.

Being a proxy war since the outbreak of the Iranian revolution, it is unlikely that Iran and Israel will reach the war in the way that Russia conducts its offensive in Ukraine, for example.

Distance and geography rule out a long-term conflict over territory.

But what is more likely is a large-scale air attack by Israel against Iran and its proxies and forces in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

On the other hand, the Iranian effort will focus on attacks against merchant ships in the Gulf, launching long-range missiles against Israel from Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, and launching attacks against countries Iran defines as enemies such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

And Iran will fight Israel, as it has for decades, until the last Arab.

This is not a new development. For decades, Iran has tested missile attacks that simulate Israeli targets and American warships.

On the other hand, Israel repeatedly shows that it has the ability to conduct remote military and intelligence operations, even in downtown Tehran.

The implication of these maneuvers now is to highlight Israel's ability and act as a deterrent to further Iranian military action.

Emirati and Israeli officials during a meeting in Tel Aviv (Emirati press)

Iran considers itself the leader of the "axis of resistance" against a regime led by the United States and Israel that targets Iranian interests in the region.

The other members of the resistance axis are Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syria, forces in Iraq, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthis in Yemen.

This axis opposes any country that hosts US forces or recognizes Israel.

Thus, Iran views the Abrahamic Agreements between Bahrain, the UAE and Israel as a direct challenge to and a military threat to the "axis of resistance".

Israel does not welcome a multi-front war, but it has realized that it may have to fight it, so it prepared for operations on multiple fronts.

In my view, Israel feels that it can rely on its relations with Russia as well as on its conventional ability to strike to keep Syria marginalized during the conflict.

Israel feels that it is able to contain the Gaza Strip by strengthening security operations if the need arises.

It also prepared the international public opinion to launch aggressive strikes inside Lebanon by announcing Hezbollah's missile manufacturing sites in the civilian neighborhoods of Beirut and elsewhere.

Such a conflict is likely to damage Israel's image internationally, but if it faces a major military threat, it will prioritize the destruction of that threat over its own image.

Hezbollah operates as a de facto state within the Lebanese state, and is now reluctant to take military action against Israel due to the threat of massive military retaliation.

Hamas is different. It is an unaccountable government in a small pocket of land that is not economically viable alone, and could explode at any moment.

It is possible for Hamas to enter into a conflict with Israel, but as a reaction to some unexpected incidents, for example incidents or escalation in the West Bank or Jerusalem.

As for Hezbollah, it would not go to war unless Iran decided to do so and saw that other powers, such as Syria and Hamas, were engaged in a state of war and there was a high probability of defeating Israel.

Israel will not escalate its military actions unless it is attacked or if there is a major attack on Israeli interests, such as an attack that resulted in a large number of casualties against Jewish interests or a group in Europe.

US forces in a joint military maneuver with the (European) Israeli army

Relations between the United States and Israel have improved dramatically since the end of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's rule over which the American public was divided, with many viewing him as a belligerent, belligerent.

By contrast, the current Israeli government is seen as less of a conflict-seeker, and therefore Washington is almost certain to support Israel.

And if there is a war in general, the main American response will be to secure shipping operations in the Gulf from any Iranian attack, in addition to providing the latest weapons to Israel.