|
Trending Topics
|
The Only Interpretation of Iran's Attack that Matters Is Israel's
(National Review) Noah Rothman - Iran's direct attack on Israel over the weekend was not "designed to fail" or an elaborately telegraphed de-escalatory overture. It was a radical and audacious assault on Israel, and its aim was to kill as many Israelis as possible. Over 300 munitions were expended in a coordinated assault on Israel by both the Islamic Republic and the constellation of terrorist groups it controls. It was an unprecedented event. It was intended to overwhelm Israeli air defenses and culminate in mass casualties. There can be no doubt that Iran's intent was the worst-case scenario. By any rational interpretation of the laws of armed conflict, a state of war today exists between Israel and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Israel is obliged to respond to this attack in more than equal measure. Israel cannot afford to allow periodic direct Iranian attacks on its territory to become the background soundtrack to daily life. It certainly cannot establish a precedent whereby its allies have a veto over its ability to defend itself. The notion that Israel can simply absorb this attack so we can de-escalate and be done is fanciful to the point of delusion. While the vast majority of the ordnance Iran launched at Israel didn't make it into Israeli airspace, ballistic missiles most certainly did. If any of those missiles were armed with nuclear warheads, Israel would face a genuinely existential disaster. From Jerusalem's perspective, there can be no living with an undeterred millenarian outfit like the Islamic Republic.