It has become known that Iran is taking pleasure in what it describes as being “psychological deterrence” through the containment of the Israeli threats to strike its nuclear facilities with counter threats that are made on a quasi daily basis. Moreover, it is certain that the Iranians will be pleased about the disappointment of Former American Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, toward Israel's wasting of an “opportunity” to bomb the Iranian nuclear Bushehr reactor which will be inaugurated the day after tomorrow. As for the traditional question regarding whether or not there will be war, it will probably not find a comprehensive answer in the mutual American-Israeli instigation, which is particularly revealing the wish of Barack Obama's administration and Benjamin Netanyahu's government to see the other side launching the first rocket on the Iranian facilities – regardless of the extent to which the combat will expand and even if the two sides were to fight as part of one front. In other words, regardless of whether or not the strike were to turn into a regional nuclear war. A few days ago, and while talking about joint training with the Marines in Negev, it was among the rare times when the Israeli television recognized the “side by side against a common enemy” combat scenario, if the “changes within the Middle East” were to call for it. The Hebrew state is not showing any concern while it is getting ready for this possibility, as it is relying on the experience accumulated by the two armies in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, at a time when the Iranian “deterrence” is threatening to paralyze the American military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the game of exchanged prices, the Americans might argue that the Iranian threat in itself constitutes a public recognition of Tehran's ability to recruit “agents,” allies or both, in order to bomb those bases, considering that the missile strikes alone will not be sufficient to neutralize the American military “reserves tank” in Iraq and Afghanistan. As for the renewed Iranian threat to paralyze the Hormuz Strait and international navigation through it, i.e. the international oil vein, it cannot be separated from calculations related to the ability of the Revolutionary Guard with its miniature submarines to face the NATO fleets. Nonetheless, this threat remains favored by this “Guard” to pressure the West and the Gulf States (to get them to continue opposing war). It is certain that the closing of the Hormuz Strait will be considered an act of war, and that it will topple the justifications validating the “neutrality” of many states toward the problem of the Iranian nuclear program. The inauguration of Bushehr, a new step in the series of crises affecting this program, is once again raising questions regarding whether or not the American administration trusts the promises of Netanyahu's government in regard to “self-restraint” and the “non-staging” of a military strike without Washington's knowledge. While the paradox which emerged during the last few days revolves around the purpose of the exchanged instigation between the two sides in order not to show leniency with the Iranian “zero option” in its defiance of the sanctions, the Israeli military sources that were chosen to “leak” inclinations prevailing within the Hebrew state, do not conceal an optimism felt toward the “opportunity” of the American pullout from Iraq which they perceived as being a helping factor in getting Washington to focus its efforts on the “Iranian threat.” However, will Iran not rush to fill the vacuum which will be caused by the pullout in Iraq through allies and agents? Moreover, can the command of the Israeli army and the Marines that are training in Negev ignore the rise of the Iranian cards in filling this vacuum and turning all the countries of the two rivers into a third line for the defense of the trade-off (between “nuclear power” and regional influence) following the Lebanon and Gaza lines? For months now, the Israeli army's command has been talking about the necessity not to waste time in confronting Tehran's maneuvers… with media muscles. For that purpose, it has been flaunting the defense systems which will render the “Iron Dome,” the “David Sling” and the “Magic Wand” sufficient to face a space raining rockets from Hezbollah's and Hamas's bases and the remote platforms of the Iranian army. And since defense implicates an attack carried out by the other side - while in this case it will be a retaliation response - the chances of an Israeli surprise attack remain more likely. Behind the commotion of the threats, the timing of a possible war is fading away, although some in the region still believe it unlikely even if the circumstances of the “major deal” become ripe. In the meantime, the American is wagering on its “magician's wand,” i.e. the effects of the painful sanctions whose symptoms will not be seen before many months.
