What it is about
Prof. Boaz Ganor of Reichman University provides an in-depth analysis of Iran’s strategic involvement in the Israel-Hamas War, claiming that the conflict was orchestrated and funded by Iran with the aim of exacting revenge, shifting global attention, and preventing regional normalization.
Why it matters
This revelation highlights Iran’s deliberate efforts to destabilize the region by supporting proxy groups like Hamas and emphasizes the crucial nature of addressing not just immediate threats but also larger strategic dangers to Israel.
Orchestrated Aggression
Prof. Ganor argues that the entire conflict was meticulously planned by Iran for three main reasons:
Revenge
Iran sought revenge for various actions against it, including attacks on its scientists, infrastructure, and cyber facilities.
Strategic Distraction
Iran aimed to divert international focus from its near-attainment of military nuclear capability by opening a new conflict front.
Preventing Normalization
Iran was determined to prevent normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia, fearing the formation of a regional alliance that could pose a significant threat to its interests.
Calculated Planning
Prof. Ganor asserts that Iran carefully calculated the planning of Israel’s involvement in the war. By using Hamas as a proxy, they were able to obscure their direct involvement while ensuring the conflict would be prolonged yet contained.
Prof. Ganor’s Insight
The damage inflicted by Hamas was significant but represented Iran’s smaller, yet still potent, efforts to destabilize Israel through indirect means. The denial systems set in place by figures such as Ismail Haniyeh and Nasrallah further distanced Iran from direct blame.
Response Strategy Re-Evaluation
According to Prof. Ganor, Israel’s response played into Iran’s strategic goals. He suggests Israel should have focused on Hezbollah, the larger strategic threat. This approach could have potentially deterred further aggression by demonstrating strength against more formidable adversaries.
Implications for Israeli Policy
Prof. Ganor’s analysis calls for a reassessment of Israel’s counter-terrorism strategies. It underscores the need to pivot attention to larger threats originating from powerful regional actors like Hezbollah and Iran, rather than being absorbed by smaller, immediate skirmishes orchestrated by proxy forces.
Conclusion
Prof. Boaz Ganor’s insights challenge current perspectives on dealing with terrorism and provoke new discussions on national security policies. As the Middle East remains volatile, focused strategies against larger threats are essential to ensuring Israel’s ongoing security.
This story was first published on jpost.com.