5 Above all, Israel succeeded in surprising Iran. Through coordinated operations, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), in concert with the United States, delivered powerful and precise blows to critical Iranianmilitary infrastructure, particularly its deeply fortified nuclear facilities. This was a campaign meticulously designed to achieve strategic objectives while avoiding a prolonged regional war. In doing so, Israel demonstrated clear military superiority, exploited the element of surprise, and concluded the campaign on terms widely viewed as optimal from a strategic standpoint. This volume seeks to provide a panoramic and multidisciplinary view of the war and its broader implications. Authored by leading experts in the fields of strategy, international relations, defense policy, and energy geopolitics, the study presents a layered, while not yet comprehensive, analysis that goes beyond battlefield outcomes. It examines the roles played by key global actors – the United States, China, Russia, India and Pakistan – and addresses crucial strategic domains, including nuclear policy, missile defense, energy markets and multilateral defense frameworks. PART I: ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES VERSUS IRAN IN THE IRAN WAR The first part of the analysis examines the strategic dynamics between Israel and the United States during the Iran War. Ran Segev’s assessment of Israel’s strategic calculus makes clear that the struggle against Iran’s nuclear program has long been at the core of Israeli national security strategy. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu adopted a policy that placed Israel at the forefront of international efforts to counter Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) imposed certain limitations on Iran’s nuclear activities, but from Israel’s perspective, it suffered from significant flaws. By 2024, Iran had achieved the capacity to enrich sufficient fissile material for nine to ten atomic bombs within a matter of weeks, effectively becoming a “threshold state.” From January 2025 onwards, Israeli intelligence assessed with increasing concern that Iran was moving toward nuclear breakout. The subsequent military operation against Iran marked a notable shift in Israel’s strategy. Beyond Iran’snuclear advancements, twoadditional factors reinforced Israel’s determination: the elimination of Iran’s “ring of fire” around Israel during the Iron Swords war, and the strategic alliance with the United States. From Israel’s standpoint, close Photo: Shutterstock coordination with Washington was essential in planning and executing the attack. In Israel’s judgment, in addition to dismantling the Fordow enrichment facility, active American participation would be critical in compelling Iran to concede. Today, Israel can be confident in its strength but must remain vigilant; regarding Iran, Israelis know they can never afford to become complacent. Brigadier-General (ret.) Eran Ortal characterizes Operation Rising Lion as an outstanding military achievement, but stresses that it did not in itself fulfill Israel’s broader strategic objectives. As successful as Rising Lion was, it reaffirmed David Ben-Gurion’s security doctrine: Israel is not a regional hegemon and does not unilaterally shape the regional order. To preserve its regional and global advantages, continue preventing Iranian nuclearization, and support the free world with robust and repeatable military capabilities, Israel must critically assess both the successes and the limitations of the war. Among the clearest lessons is the value of initiative and surprise. Additional takeaways include: the potential to sustain a significant multi-layered qualitative advantage; approaches to aerial warfare that integrate stand-in covert stratagems with other operational components; the inherent vulnerability of centralized forces to decapitation strikes; the strategic effect of eliminating technical expertise by targeting engineers and facilities; recognition that the future of missile defense will rely on enhancing offensive components; and the potential of combining covert operations with exploitation of supply chains to produce kinetic effects. Dr. Uzi Rubin notes that Operation Rising Lion featured the most intensive confrontation to date between Iran’s offensive missile arsenal and Israel’s active and passive defenses. Israel’s defensive concept relied not only on its multilayered missile defense system, developed in cooperation with the United States, but also on preemptive airstrikes against Iranian missile launchers, which had a measurable impact. This focus on suppressing Iran’s launch capability represented a significant innovation in Israeli air doctrine, dubbed “offensive defense”. Iranian ballistic missiles launched at Israel suffered an estimated failure rate of 88–90 percent, likely due in part to technical malfunctions. Simultaneously, Israel’s airborne defenses decisively defeated Iran’s UAV offensive. Iran’s campaign appeared to have two principal objectives: to inflict maximum damage and casualties in Israel’s major cities and to disrupt its economy. While the first objective met with partial success, the second failed entirely.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDU2MA==