Despite the undoubted military successes chalked up in the first few days of the war in Iran, Israel and the US are not entirely on the same page when it comes to the war’s aims, and this could cause difficulties down the line.
Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Tuesday reiterated that the military campaign will create the conditions for regime change in Iran. And he dismissed concerns among many Americans that a protracted campaign lies ahead.
“You’re not going to have an endless war because ... this terror regime in Iran is at its weakest point,” he said. “This is going to be a quick and decisive action.”
While there is a wide consensus in Israel – including among Netanyahu’s opponents – on the need for regime change, Washington is sending out mixed messages.
READ MORE
US president Donald Trump sometimes mentions regime change and sometimes doesn’t. In public statements on Monday, both US war secretary Pete Hegseth and secretary of state Marco Rubio avoided listing regime change as the aim, citing neutralising the Iranian missile, navy and nuclear threats as the key objectives.
In addition to targeting senior regime figures and military installations, Israeli strikes are also hitting government agencies dedicated to domestic security and suppressing opposition – Revolutionary Guard and police compounds – in a bid to encourage demonstrators to take to the streets.
From Israel’s standpoint, the only scenario that could turn the mood against the war would be mass civilian casualties from Iranian missile attacks.
This could happen, but the expectation is that with each passing day, as more launchers and missile sites are hit, Tehran’s ability to damage Israel’s home front is diminished.
Trump, with one eye on the midterm elections, has different calculations. He could be persuaded to end the campaign if US casualties rise, if domestic opposition to the war increases, if the economic cost becomes too much or if pressure from US Gulf allies mounts.
A “Venezuela scenario” under Washington – where whoever replaces Khamenei would accept a modified nuclear deal plus oil concessions – could provide an off-ramp for Trump. For Israel, such a deal would be considered a missed opportunity of historical proportions.
Although some Iranians came on to the streets to celebrate Khamenei’s death, there are still no signs of a repeat of the mass protests that shook the regime in January. There are also no signs of defections from the armed forces.
Both Hamas and Hizbullah have survived devastating military defeats. Iran’s regime may prove to be just as resilient.
In the absence of a popular uprising, Washington may soon be trying to scramble for an exit strategy that Israel finds difficult to accept.
