(Dobbs) Israel Has The Upper Hand Against Iran, But Also Has Taken Some Hits

Stability in the whole region hangs in the balance.

No one can say where this new war between Israel and Iran is going. Not the Israelis, not the Iranians, certainly not the Trump administration in Washington. It’s too early. No one can say whether, in the long term, it will make for a more peaceful world, or a more perilous one. It could be more peaceful if each side pulls back from the brink and declares its aims met and treats this as a brawl, not a battle. But given the long animosity between the two and the bitter punches each has thrown at the other side over the years, that’s not likely to happen, which could make it more perilous.

Israel has the upper hand. Between a highly skilled air force and a highly sophisticated intelligence network on the ground, Israel can inflict a lot more harm on Iran than Iran can inflict on Israel. But Israel inevitably will get hurt too. Iran might not be able to deliver the “crushing response” it has promised, but so far Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are in its gunsights and have taken some direct hits. The Israelis can’t shoot down every missile or drone that Iran sends in their direction.

So the question isn’t so much about who “wins,” but about who changes.

First, Iran. Israel’s comprehensive attacks can lead in two directions. On the one hand, they can strengthen the dissidents in the Islamic Republic who have long openly if riskily argued that their radical government, between supporting anti-Western terrorists and enriching nuclear fuel, has put not just their economy but their lives in jeopardy. This post yesterday on X about Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is an example: “Bibi Is Spot On. We Share The Same Enemy.”

I know from my time covering Iran decades ago that all of its people are not religious fanatics and many would overturn the Islamic regime if they could. Even a despotic government like theirs is not immune to popular discontent on the streets.

On the other hand, Israel’s attacks can bind Iranians together and inadvertently inspire citizens of different political and religious persuasions to close ranks, to take the emotional view that “an attack on one of us is an attack on us all.” I’ve seen it happen elsewhere— it even happened for a short time here in the otherwise divided United States after the terror attacks on 9/11. If, as some of its citizens want, Iran eventually is going to move in a more moderate direction, forsaking both its funding for terrorists and its enrichment of uranium, this event probably will set that all back.

And Israel? Some calculations are similar. There are Israelis who believe that Netanyahu had no choice but to attack Iran in full force. They believe that Iran is closer to producing a nuclear weapon than anyone admits— the International Atomic Energy Agency said as much earlier this week— and that they will never be safe until the Islamic Republic is forced to its knees and loses any ability to threaten them. However, as of this writing, reports say that while Israel inflicted damage around the edges of Iran’s deeply protected nuclear installations, it did not strike them in the heart.

That’s not to say though that it won’t lay them low in the third wave of attacks, or the fourth wave, or however many it might take, because Israel has passed the point of only issuing warnings. The Israeli prime minister said in a video address to the people of Iran, “More is on the way.”

But there also are Israelis who believe that if their military proves incapable of disemboweling Iran’s nuclear facilities, they will live under the heightened threat of a nuclear attack to the end of their days. Some also worry that Israel’s military forces, as battle-hardened as they are, could stretch themselves too thin, waging war on an enemy more than a thousand miles away.

So while this might be an existential moment for an outgunned and outmaneuvered Iranian regime, the same might be said about Israel. As former Soviet dissident and, after defecting to Israel, Israeli government minister Natan Sharansky wrote as the attacks were in progress, “The Jewish state’s very existence hangs in the balance.”

Stability in the whole region hangs in the balance. Right now Israel and Iran are on fire, and as history is our guide, the flames could spread. If this war doesn’t end quickly, oil prices will shoot up in more Western economies and terrorists will shoot at more Western targets.

A more peaceful world, or a more perilous one? No one, at this stage, can say.

Over more than five decades Greg Dobbs has been a correspondent for two television networks including ABC News, a political columnist for The Denver Post and syndicated columnist for Scripps newspapers, a moderator on Rocky Mountain PBS, and author of two books, including one about the life of a foreign correspondent called “Life in the Wrong Lane.” He also co-authored a book about the seminal year for baby boomers, called “1969: Are You Still Listening?” He has covered presidencies, politics, and the U.S. space program at home, and wars, natural disasters, and other crises around the globe, from Afghanistan to South Africa, from Iran to Egypt, from the Soviet Union to Saudi Arabia, from Nicaragua to Namibia, from Vietnam to Venezuela, from Libya to Liberia, from Panama to Poland. Dobbs has won three Emmys, the Distinguished Service Award from the Society of Professional Journalists, and as a 39-year resident of Colorado, a place in the Denver Press Club Hall of Fame.

You can learn more at GregDobbs.net