by Kobi Eliraz and Dr. Chanan Shai Arutz-7 commentators, translated by Hillel Fendel.
Kobi Eliraz, former Settlement Affairs Advisor to several Defense Ministers: "Israel's attack must include an Iranian nuclear installation, or at least one of its oil refineries."
Most unfortunately, even after the great achievement and miracles of this past Saturday night, and despite the fact that the Iranian missile barrage is a casus belli of the first degree, calls are being sounded even from the right-wing to "show restraint" in our military response on Iranian territory. This is wrong! Restraint is not strength, and deterrence is not a good enough defense. To think otherwise is a total mistake, in my opinion. Iran must be made to pay for the attack it carried out against the State of Israel, in cash, for all to see – right now.
Yes, there are many geopolitical considerations to be taken into account: the US elections, our relations with China and Russia, oil from Saudi Arabia and Iran, and more – but still and all, Israel must exact a painful price from Iran. Israel has dealt successfully in the past with American objections and vetoes, starting with the establishment of the State and in many wars since then – and many times, American ended up justifying our decisions. Strong Israeli responses of this type have cemented Israel's status as a regional power that knows how to look out for itself. "We are not a banana republic," Menachem Begin told the US Ambassador to Israel in 1982.
The appropriate Israeli response must mean the destruction of at least one Iranian nuclear installation. This will not spell the end of the Islamic revolution, nor will it be a mortal blow to the Ayatollahs' regime – but it will strike hard at Iran's nuclear ambitions and will postpone an Iranian nuclear bomb for an unknown amount of time.
Alternatively – and this could possibly be the best we can hope for under the circumstances – Israel must attack one of Iran's oil refineries. This will significantly damage the Iranian economy and will impede Iran's ability to fund Hizbullah, the Houthis, and the militias in Syria and Iraq. It will also be in the oil-selling interests of both Russia and China.
Dr. Chanan Shai, IDF lieutenant-colonel in the reserves and an expert in military and political strategic thinking and planning: "The Israel Air Force's brilliant operation against the Iranian offensive must be turned into a catalyst to overthrow Khomeinism."
War is not won via defense alone. The right time must be found to carry out an offensive – and that "right time" is now: Israel is receiving broad praise and support from world leaders and even the media. To take strong advantage of these accomplishments, it would be best now to hold off on the planned Gaza offensive in Rafah, and to aim even higher.
Now that Israel has brought a great achievement to the U.S., its status vis-à-vis the superpower has changed radically – and the dialogue between the two countries must change accordingly.
In accordance with the overall objective of Israel and the democratic West – which is the overthrow of Khomeinism and radical Islam (which took the place of Communism as the active enemy of the West), and in keeping with the formative principle of von Clausewitz regarding the essence of defense and the importance of momentum, Israel must strike while the iron is hot, as quickly as possible, in one or more of the following ways:
Destroying Iran's nuclear capabilities
A decisive, paralyzing blow at Iran's war-making capacity
Uprooting Iran's stronghold in Israel's vicinity
One thing Israel must not do is to strike out at the symbols of the regime simply to humiliate the leadership. This would be a childish vengeance with no real advantage in weakening Iran's physical strength.
If for some reason, the first two goals are unattainable, Israel must act immediately to uproot Iran's influence in the countries around us. This means to liquidate the Hizbullah "kingdom," which is the top Iranian proxy strategically close to Israel.
The challenge in fighting Hizbullah is to make sure that a long war of attrition does not develop, which would be against Israel's interests and therefore a victory for Hizbullah.
Hizbullah's strategy will be to take advantage of the mountainous and hilly terrain in southern Lebanon to make it hard for the Israeli forces to advance in their campaign to silence the constant shooting attacks on Israel's civilian northern front. If the residents' return to their homes in northern Israel is delayed, this will cause terrible hardship and damage to Israel, and may even lead to international intervention that will force a ceasefire upon Israel in very adverse conditions.
The IDF's challenge in the war against Hizbullah is, therefore, to neutralize the source of its strength – namely, its control over the influential factor known as 'time'. To this end, a clever and tricky operative plan is required that will take the campaign's 'time' and duration out of Hizbullah's hands and transfer it to the IDF. Unfortunately, the IDF replaced its doctrine of "winning" with one of "deterrence." This is precisely why Israel has not won several recent wars and campaigns.
And it is precisely this IDF weakness that Hizbullah is depending on for the victory it hopes to attain. The IDF must therefore rectify this weakness – it's definitely possible – and come up with a new brilliant plan that will enable us to defeat Hizbullah in the time-frame that we determine.
For Israel to be stuck in two simultaneous wars of attrition would be disastrous. If the IDF plans to defeat Hizbullah as it did/is doing with Hamas, via "painful strikes," deterrent damage, and "chewing up" tunnels and their openings one at a time, instead of directly and quickly seeking actual victory, it would be better to give up this "right moment" that has been created by our success this past weekend.