Introduction
Last weekend reserved a special seat in the region's memory here. For a long time, newsrooms have not focused to this degree on live broadcasts that last for several hours. Perhaps since March 2003, when American missiles rained down on Baghdad, beginning the journey to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime.It is no exaggeration to say that the new night was more exciting and more dangerous, at least for us, when we saw the missiles and drones from both sides colliding in the sky of Beirut.
This new night was exciting, dangerous, and open to dire consequences. It revealed the fragility and tendency of the Middle East to slide.
Skies were closed, airports were dark, and planes were flying. The people of the area saw flocks of firebirds crossing the air. On the other hand, planes and missiles took off from everywhere. A long night in which state leaders, army commanders, “generals,” militias, and citizens stayed awake.
It wasn’t the night of the “big strike” that had been whispered about in closed rooms for years. Its essence is the launching of a rain of missiles at Israel from Iran along with its allies. The doors of war have not opened wide.
It was a response that was less than a war project. It’s a strike in the sense of its occurrence and Iran’s direct involvement in it. It was like a reminder of the ability to set the precedent for a direct Iranian attack on Israel.
This month began with an explosive message that the “last weekend night” cannot be understood without referring to it. Where the Israeli Prime Minister made an extremely dangerous decision. He considered the meeting of seven of the most prominent officers of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Damascus to be an unmissable opportunity. He did not stop at the immunity of the Iranian consulate where they met. He destroyed the consulate and its occupants, ignoring the fact that it was Iranian territory.
Many questions were raised by Netanyahu's decision.
Did he get tired of exchanging blows with agent boxers so he decided to call the big boxer to the ring?
Did he choose to lure Iran into a face-to-face confrontation away from shadow wars?
Did he want to remind the West that the great existential threat to Israel comes from the officers of the “Iranian Revolutionary Guard” and not from Gaza and its tunnels?
Did he decide to risk launching a major fire instead of worrying about a missile from Yemen, a drone from Iraq, and a distraction war from Lebanon?
Has he set a trap that will be difficult for Iran to escape and avoid?
It was difficult for Iran not to respond to the consulate attack. This is because Netanyahu challenged its image inside Iran and at the regional level. On the other hand, Iran does not want to go to an open war because for sure America will not remain outside it. Iranian officials took their time for about two weeks to think about this matter, then the response came that introduced into the equation Iran's ability to attack Israel directly without causing anything that would justify launching a war.
Politicians and the military are still busy interpreting the meanings of the “Night of Messages.” Iran sent a message to Israel, but after that, they sent a message to America stating that they didn’t seek to expand the war. On the night of the missiles and drones, America sent a clear message to Israel which is: that criticizing Netanyahu’s behavior in Gaza does not mean abandoning him or being lenient regarding what affects Israel’s security.
Conclusion
The question that was asked the day after the consulate attack was clear.
Will Iran respond and target Israel, how and to what extent?
The day after the last Iranian night, a similar question was raised:
Will Israel respond to Iran, how, and to what extent?
Washington unhesitatingly supported Netanyahu in the face of the Iranian attack. But also they were quick to clarify that they do not support an Israeli response and will not participate in it if it occurs.
These coming days will also be full of questions, for example: Can Netanyahu not respond? If he responds to American advice, what is the price he asks for? In addition to military and economic support, does he demand help in “Rafah”, or does he demand not to move quickly towards establishing the two-state solution as a mandatory path to the future? Is he demanding a formula to stop the confrontation, which in its seventh month has turned into a costly war of attrition, especially after they said that the night of the drones and missiles was also the “night of the billion” because it cost Israel about a billion dollars?
We can’t do anything but wait to find out what the belligerents concluded from the night of questions and fiery messages in the atmosphere of the boiling Middle East.
*Image designed using Canva