Israel’s military operations in Iran have yielded significant results, with experts considering it a culmination of extensive preparation, technological advancement, and intelligence enhancement. According to Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Israel has achieved a decisive victory by disrupting Iran’s military leadership and reducing its missile capabilities. Despite suffering retaliatory attacks, including a missile strike on Soroka Medical Center that injured hundreds, military analysts assert that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) maintain a strategic advantage. Dubowitz likens the current situation to the Six-Day War of 1967, indicating that, while the operations may extend beyond six days, Israel’s trajectory suggests overwhelming military superiority.
Strategists like Hilla Hadad-Chmelnik emphasize that Israel’s military success is no coincidence; it is the result of years of dedicated planning and adaptation. The IDF has developed long-range strike capabilities and a sophisticated intelligence infrastructure, drawing from lessons learned in conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah. This comprehensive preparation has manifested in effective operational tactics that focus on neutralizing threats quickly, a method honed during conflicts near Israel’s borders, and now applied against Iran’s more complex threats.
Hadad-Chmelnik notes that the IDF’s air dominance is striking, with Israeli aircraft conducting operations over Iranian territory frequently. The operational effectiveness of advanced defense systems, such as Iron Dome and David’s Sling, has also contributed to Israel’s capacity to withstand Iranian missile assaults, intercepting over 90% of incoming threats. This level of efficacy in missile defense highlights Israel’s preparedness, despite the ongoing risks that accompany such high-stakes military endeavors.
Meanwhile, Dubowitz points out that major objectives remain unattained, particularly concerning Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility. Although Israel has decimated a sizable portion of Iran’s nuclear capabilities and eliminated key nuclear figures, the Fordow site remains intact. Dubowitz urges that efforts must focus on dismantling this facility, either through diplomatic means or, if necessary, military intervention, to ensure Iran cannot restore its nuclear program and pose a continued threat.
The current military campaign has created an opportunity for the United States, according to Hadad-Chmelnik. With much of Iran’s military resources already compromised, American involvement could transition from a quagmire into a path for decisive success. This clear strategic landscape diverges significantly from complexities faced in conflicts like Ukraine or Afghanistan, suggesting potential for effective U.S. engagement.
Lastly, Dubowitz reflects on the broader implications of Israel’s military actions, indicating that strikes against Iranian internal security infrastructure may eventually allow for civil unrest within Iran. He remains hopeful yet cautious, viewing this period as a possible turning point in diminishing Iran’s nuclear ambitions while empowering its populace. Nevertheless, he warns that failure to address the remaining Fordow facility could jeopardize the gains achieved, potentially leading to a hollow victory for Israel and its allies.
