Israeli Military Actions Against Iran Could Indicate Shift in Strategy, Experts Say
A panel of experts discusses the implications of Israel's military operations targeting Iran amidst escalating tensions.
During a recent panel discussion hosted by the Middle East Institute, experts analyzed the ongoing military actions by Israel against Iran, suggesting that a potential objective might be to induce regime change in Tehran.
The discussion featured notable figures including retired General Joseph L. Votel, former commander of US Central Command; retired Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan, former commander of the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet; and Alex Vatanka, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute and an expert on Iran.
Alex Vatanka indicated that while it is still premature to solidify the belief that Israel’s primary aim extends beyond disrupting Iran's nuclear capabilities to regime change, indications suggest a possible shift in strategy.
He stated, "That’s certainly what I think a majority of Iranian officials think that Israel wants." The uncertainty hinges on whether Israel can garner support from the United States, specifically from President Trump, akin to initial backing for prior military actions.
In recent months, Israel has executed targeted attacks on various Iranian military infrastructures and leadership, which prompted retaliatory missile and drone strikes from Tehran directed at Israeli territories.
Despite the intensifying conflict, panelists expressed a consensus that it is unlikely to escalate into a broader regional confrontation involving additional countries.
Vatanka characterized Iran’s perception of victory as contingent on its survival amidst heightened aggression from Israel, which benefits from support from the United States and much of Europe.
In contrast, he noted that Tehran appears to lack substantial support from its traditional allies, including members of the so-called 'axis of resistance,' which comprises groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which have faced significant setbacks due to Israeli military actions.
VADM Donegan raised questions regarding whether Iran might seek to re-establish dialogue as a means to de-escalate tensions.
He remarked, “I think it’s a long shot, to be honest, that they’ll come to the table in the near future.”
Moreover, the Strait of Hormuz—a critical waterway for oil shipments—remains a focal point of concern.
Although Iran possesses the capability to close it, Donegan pointed out that doing so would eliminate Iran's access to the economic benefits derived from its oil exports.
The discussion underscored the complexity of the operational dynamics, with experts noting that the direction Israel intends to take in its campaign could significantly shape the outcome of these confrontations.
The role of the United States was depicted as one of moderation, with President Trump keeping diplomatic channels open, in contrast to Israel's aggressive posture by threatening further military action should Tehran fail to comply with Western demands.
The discussion featured notable figures including retired General Joseph L. Votel, former commander of US Central Command; retired Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan, former commander of the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet; and Alex Vatanka, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute and an expert on Iran.
Alex Vatanka indicated that while it is still premature to solidify the belief that Israel’s primary aim extends beyond disrupting Iran's nuclear capabilities to regime change, indications suggest a possible shift in strategy.
He stated, "That’s certainly what I think a majority of Iranian officials think that Israel wants." The uncertainty hinges on whether Israel can garner support from the United States, specifically from President Trump, akin to initial backing for prior military actions.
In recent months, Israel has executed targeted attacks on various Iranian military infrastructures and leadership, which prompted retaliatory missile and drone strikes from Tehran directed at Israeli territories.
Despite the intensifying conflict, panelists expressed a consensus that it is unlikely to escalate into a broader regional confrontation involving additional countries.
Vatanka characterized Iran’s perception of victory as contingent on its survival amidst heightened aggression from Israel, which benefits from support from the United States and much of Europe.
In contrast, he noted that Tehran appears to lack substantial support from its traditional allies, including members of the so-called 'axis of resistance,' which comprises groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which have faced significant setbacks due to Israeli military actions.
VADM Donegan raised questions regarding whether Iran might seek to re-establish dialogue as a means to de-escalate tensions.
He remarked, “I think it’s a long shot, to be honest, that they’ll come to the table in the near future.”
Moreover, the Strait of Hormuz—a critical waterway for oil shipments—remains a focal point of concern.
Although Iran possesses the capability to close it, Donegan pointed out that doing so would eliminate Iran's access to the economic benefits derived from its oil exports.
The discussion underscored the complexity of the operational dynamics, with experts noting that the direction Israel intends to take in its campaign could significantly shape the outcome of these confrontations.
The role of the United States was depicted as one of moderation, with President Trump keeping diplomatic channels open, in contrast to Israel's aggressive posture by threatening further military action should Tehran fail to comply with Western demands.