In a series of recent military operations, Israel has carried out multiple precision strikes against Iran, aiming to weaken Iran's military capabilities and demonstrate its military superiority in the region. This operation not only achieved military goals, but may also have limited Iran's response at the diplomatic level.

Israel's strikes and their goals

Daniel Hagari, spokesman for the Israeli Defense Forces, detailed the scope and goals of the attack in a televised briefing. According to Hagari, Israel targeted Iran's missile manufacturing facilities and Iranian air defense systems that restricted Israel's air operations. After this operation, Israel's air force further expanded its freedom of action in Iranian airspace, demonstrating its technical and strategic precision.

Iran, through its official media, said that it had successfully intercepted multiple attacks with limited losses. Nevertheless, these statements failed to cover up Israel's military superiority and Iran's passive situation.

Iran's restraint and international response

It is noteworthy that Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei did not call for immediate retaliation after the attack, but instead took a more cautious stance. He said that the impact of the attack should not be exaggerated, and left the decision-making power on how to respond to the authorities. This attitude shows that Iran is still considering whether to escalate the conflict.

Internationally, the UN Security Council will hold a meeting after the attack to respond to Iran's accusations and review whether Israel's actions violated international law. Although the attack did not target Iran's nuclear facilities, Rafael Mariano Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, reminded all parties to exercise restraint and avoid actions that may threaten the safety of nuclear materials.

Israel's strategic intention: limit the escalation of the conflict

Israel's action clearly has a clear strategic purpose: to avoid the escalation of the conflict as much as possible. The targets Israel chose to attack were mainly military facilities, and did not extend to civilian facilities or oil and gas facilities. It is reported that although there were rumors that Israel initially intended to attack Iran's energy infrastructure, it was not implemented in the end. This decision may have been made at the suggestion of the United States. In response, the Israeli government firmly denied it, saying that the target selection was entirely based on national interests and was not affected by external pressure.

Beni Sabit, an Iran expert at the Tel Aviv Institute for National Security Studies, said that Israel's attack did not exceed expectations and was mainly aimed at military targets. Israel obviously hopes to send a signal that it does not want to escalate the conflict through this limited attack. This shows that while Israel is demonstrating its military strength, it still wants to leave room for diplomacy.

Iran's choice: de-escalation or escalation?

The focus of the current situation is how Iran responds. Although Iran has the ability to retaliate, choosing restraint is also a sensible strategy. Israel did not issue emergency instructions to its people after the attack, suggesting that it did not think Iran would immediately take counterattacks. This judgment was supported by domestic security experts in Israel, who generally believed that Iran might not escalate the conflict with Israel for the time being.

Shapiro, a professor of national security at Bar-Ilan University, said that if Iran chooses to continue to attack Israel, it may trigger a larger regional conflict, which is not good for both sides. Shapiro believes that if Iran retaliates now, Israel will inevitably respond more fiercely, eventually leading to a more complicated and dangerous situation for both sides.

Demonstration of Israel's long-range strike capability

The strike not only demonstrated Israel's military precision and long-range strike capability, but also reflected its strategic layout in the Middle East. Nearly a month before the attack on Iran, Israel was attacked by 200 missiles from Iran. Although these missiles did not cause casualties, they caused property losses to Israel. Israel then chose precision strikes, demonstrating its ability to respond quickly and strike its opponents accurately.

Through this operation, Israel once again demonstrated its strong military capabilities to the Middle East and the world. Even in the face of complex situations, Israel can still achieve political goals through precise military operations while avoiding excessive intensification of conflicts.

Future situation: temporary easing or long-term confrontation?

Although Israel's actions have successfully achieved short-term goals, the future situation is still full of uncertainty. Israel's military advantage is obvious, but Iran's influence in the region and its potential retaliatory capabilities cannot be ignored. If Iran chooses to restrain itself, the current tension may be temporarily eased. But if Iran decides to take a more radical approach, the Middle East may face a new round of escalation of conflicts.

Domestic Israeli analysts generally believe that Iran will temporarily restrain its retaliatory actions and avoid a more direct confrontation with Israel. However, whether this prediction will come true remains to be seen. As the international community pays close attention to the situation between Iran and Israel, the next few weeks will be a critical period to determine the direction of the relationship between the two sides.

In general, through this precise military operation, Israel has demonstrated its ability and strategic wisdom to strike hostile targets, while leaving room for Iran to ease the situation. The development of the situation will depend on Iran's response strategy and the role of the international community in defusing the tensions between the two sides.