Israel's extensively planned - fully supported by United
States and its Arab allies – attack on Iran had an obvious goal of sharply
disrupting Tehran's nuclear program and lengthening the time it would need to
develop an atomic weapon. But the scale of the attacks, Israel's choice of
targets, and its politicians' own words suggest another, longer-term objective
- toppling the regime itself.
The strikes early on Friday hit not just Iran's nuclear
facilities and missile factories but also key figures in the country's military
chain of command and its nuclear scientists. These attacks were aimed at
diminishing Iran's credibility both at home and among its allies in the region
- factors that could destabilize the Iranian leadership.
Israel, in fact United States, want people of Iran to rise
up against the present clergy that is the reason the civilian casualties were
kept minimum in the initial round of attacks.
In a video address shortly after Israeli fighter jets began
striking Iranian nuclear facilities and air defence systems, Israel's
prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, appealed to the Iranian people
directly.
To recall, Israel's actions against Hezbollah had
led to a new government in Lebanon and the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria.
Netanyahu has said, “The Iranian people had an opportunity
too. I believe that the day of your liberation is near. And when that happens,
the great friendship between our two ancient peoples will flourish once
again."
Despite the damage inflicted by the unprecedented Israeli
attack, decades of enmity toward Israel - not only among Iran's rulers but its
population raises questions about the prospect for fomenting enough public
support to oust an entrenched theocratic leadership in Tehran backed by loyal
security forces.
Friday's assault was the first phase of what Israel said
would be a prolonged operation. Experts said they expected Israel would
continue to go after key Iranian nuclear infrastructure to delay Tehran's march
to a nuclear bomb - even if Israel on its own does not have the capability to
eliminate Iran's nuclear program.
Iran says its nuclear program is for civilian purposes only.
The UN nuclear watchdog concluded this week that it was in violation
of its obligations under the global non-proliferation treaty.
Israel's first salvoes targeted senior figures in Iran's
military and scientific establishment, took out much of the country's air
defence system and destroyed the above-ground enrichment plant at Iran's
nuclear site.
Israel says, as a democratic country, we believe that it is
up to the people of a country to shape their national politics, and choose their
government. The future of Iran should only be determined by the Iranian people.
US President Donald Trump's administration, while
acquiescing to Israel's strikes and helping its close ally fend off Iran's
retaliatory missile barrage, has given no indication that it seeks regime
change in Tehran.
Israel has much further to go if it is to dismantle Iran's
nuclear facilities, and military analysts have always said it might be
impossible to totally disable the well-fortified sites dotted around Iran.
The Israeli government has also cautioned that Iran's
nuclear program could not be entirely destroyed by means of a military
campaign.
"There's no way to destroy a nuclear program by
military means," Israel's National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi told
Israel's Channel 13 TV. The military campaign could, however, create conditions
for a deal with the United States that would thwart the nuclear program.
Analysts also remain sceptical that Israel will have the
munitions needed to obliterate Iran's nuclear project on its own.
"Israel probably cannot take out completely the nuclear
project on its own without the American participation," Sima Shine, a
former chief Mossad analyst and now a researcher at Israel's Institute for
National Security Studies, told reporters on Friday.
While setting back Tehran's nuclear program would have value
for Israel, the hope for regime change could explain why Israel went after so
many senior military figures, potentially throwing the Iranian security
establishment into confusion and chaos.
"These people were very vital, very knowledgeable, many
years in their jobs, and they were a very important component of the stability
of the regime, specifically the security stability of the regime," said
Shine.
"In the ideal world, Israel would prefer to see a
change of regime, no question about that," she said.
But such a change would come with risk, said Jonathan
Panikoff, a former US deputy national intelligence officer for the Middle East
who is now at the Atlantic Council.
If Israel succeeds in removing Iran's leadership, there is
no guarantee the successor that emerges would not be even more hardline in
pursuit of conflict with Israel.
"For years, many in Israel have insisted that regime
change in Iran would prompt a new and better day - that nothing could be worse
than the current theocratic regime," Panikoff said. "But history
tells us it can always be worse."
