Israel is Winning, but only tactically so far

Recent reports and assessments suggest Israel is achieving significant tactical successes in its ongoing confrontation with Iran. Precision strikes degrade nuclear facilities and ballistic missile capabilities. On the surface, the objectives outlined by leaders like Prime Minister Netanyahu – the elimination of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile threats – which he describe as the two main goals for this war – seem within reach. However, a profound and dangerous strategic miscalculation risks rendering these hard-won tactical victories utterly futile in the long run.

The core fallacy lies in believing these capabilities can be permanently neutralized while leaving the hostile regime unchanged. This is not merely an oversight; it’s strategic myopia bordering on self-sabotage.

History as a Guide: The Hamas Precedent

Look no further than Gaza for a chillingly relevant lesson. For years, Israel conducted countless operations targeting Hamas’s rocket production facilities, weapons caches, and tunnel networks. Tactical successes were frequent. Yet, did these strikes fundamentally alter Hamas’s capabilities or, more importantly, its genocidal determination against Israel? Absolutely not. Each bombardment was met with accelerated rebuilding, often with more sophisticated methods and clandestine tactics. The destruction became a fueling resentment and hardening resolve. The catastrophic events of October 7th stand as the ultimate indictment of a strategy focused solely on degrading capabilities while ignoring the ideological engine driving their regeneration. It’s like a virus in the body, If the doctor doesn’t find a way to remove it completely, It will have better ability to survive from anti bodies.

Applying the Lesson to Iran: A Regime, Not Just Reactors

Iran presents the same problem, magnified a thousandfold. Destroying a nuclear facility or a missile base today is a tactical win. But what happens tomorrow? The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), deeply embedded within Iran’s power structure and economy, possesses vast resources and unwavering ideological commitment. They will rebuild. They will get suppliers (like North Korea or Pakistan). They will redouble their clandestine efforts. Sanctions and limited strikes are irritants, not existential threats, to a regime willing to sacrifice its own people’s welfare for its revolutionary and hegemonic goals.

As I mentioned in my previous piece, Israel should achive vitory in a flash war, not a prolonged battle, and Israel should minimize the damage and trauma to the Iranian people.

Why Tactical Wins Without Regime Change are Meaningless?

The goals set by the Israel puts the cart before the horse – focusing on the weapons rather than the wielder.

Rebuilding is Inevitable

The regime views nuclear weapons and long-range missiles as existential guarantees for its survival. Destroying them provokes fury and accelerates reconstruction, often deeper underground and more dispersed. Tactical degradation is temporary.

The Ultimate Threat Persists

As long as the current extremist regime holds power, the intent to acquire nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them remains an unwavering strategic goal. They will get the bomb eventually – whether through indigenous development, covert procurement, or external assistance – if they survive.

Wasted Resources and Future Vulnerability

Pouring immense resources into repeated tactical strikes against ever-regenerating capabilities is a Sisyphean task. It drains military assets, diplomatic capital, and economic strength, leaving Israel perpetually vulnerable to the next iteration of the threat. It’s fighting the symptom, not the rootcause of disease. When the regime is changed, the threathening facilities will be dismantled easily.

The ultimate conclusion: Regime Change is the Strategic Imperative

The uncomfortable, yet inescapable truth is that the permanent elimination of the nuclear and ballistic missile threats is inextricably linked to a fundamental change in Iran’s governance. Only by dismantling the current extremist regime can the root cause of the aggression be addressed.

Removing the regime ends the cycle of destruction and rebuilding. Resources currently poured into neutralizing Iranian threats could be redirected or conserved. The region, and the world, would be vastly more secure.

Failing to pursue this strategic objective means accepting that Iran will eventually possess nuclear weapons under its current leadership. The tactical victories of today will be mere footnotes in a far more dangerous future history.

Winning Battles, Losing the War?

Israel is demonstrating formidable tactical prowess. But winning battles while losing sight of the ultimate strategic objective – the removal of a regime hell-bent on its destruction and nuclear armament – is a recipe for long-term disaster. The lessons of Hamas are stark and immediate: degrading capabilities without addressing the hostile governing entity is a temporary, costly, and ultimately failing strategy. To secure a lasting peace and genuine security, Israel and its allies must recognize that true victory over the Iranian threat demands a shift beyond tactical destruction towards the strategic imperative of regime change. Anything less is merely postponing an inevitable and far more dangerous confrontation.

The clock is ticking.