Просьба не забывать, что в основном, нижеприведенные рекламно-политические материалы, по определению, могут рассчитывать только на весьма ограниченную объективность и ориентированы, в первую очередь, на либеральную публику.
Цитата:
Цитата:
Iran's Hand on the Trigger
...
TEHRAN – Salvos of Iranian missiles rained on the occupied territories on Tuesday night, comforting the people of the region who were eagerly awaiting a response to Israel’s terror attacks in the past two months, and occupying observers with the thought of what could happen next.
Iran’s attack dubbed Operation True Promise II involved firing approximately 200 ballistic missiles at three Israeli military bases near Tel Aviv. The Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) said in a statement that 90% of the projectiles managed to hit their targets. Israel and the U.S. claimed the operation had “failed”, not addressing online footage that showed tens of Iranian missiles hit the ground after the regime’s sophisticated defense shield failed to intercept them despite help from surrounding American forces and at least one regional country.
Operation True Promise II marked the second time Iran has targeted Israel directly from its soil. In mid-April, Tehran lobbed around 300 hundred drones and missiles at the occupied territories two weeks after the regime attacked the Iranian consulate in Damascus, killing a high-ranking IRGC commander and his deputy. After April’s strikes, Iran said it would repeat the procedure more painfully if Israel harms its personnel or assets anywhere in the world.
Was Iran’s attack legal?
Iran’s attack was in line with Article 51 of the UN Charter, which states that countries have an inherent right to defend themselves when they have been the victim of an “armed attack”. The Tuesday operation came after Iran became the target of two Israeli armed attacks. One on July 31, which killed Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, and one on September 27, which claimed the life of IRGC military advisor Brigadier General Abbas Nilforooshan along with Hezbollah leader Sayyad Hassan Nasrallah in southern Beirut.
According to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Iran was willing to put off a retaliation against Israel if that meant the U.S. could successfully pressure Israel to seal a cease-fire deal with Hamas. However, after the recent round of talks - which were initiated by the U.S. following the Haniyeh assassination - failed due to Israel's intransigence, and with the assassination of Nasrallah and a buoyed wave of Israeli terrorism in Lebanon, Tehran was forced to get back on track.
What happens next?
Iran says it used only a portion of its capabilities to strike Israel Tuesday night, a claim that analysts seem to confirm. Multiple high-ranking Iranian officials have stated that they are ready to take more severe action if the regime continues its aggression and responds to the missile strikes.
Israel, for now, says it will be retaliating. On the night of the attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran had made a “big mistake” and that it would end up with the same fate as Gaza and Lebanon, as he read from a paper he was holding onto with shaking hands.
Iran’s rhetoric so far shows that while it is not looking to enter a war, it would also not shy away from one either if its interests and assets were on the line. It remains to be seen what move Israel makes next, but analysts speculate that the regime's actions will have a significant impact on the future of the region.
It is believed that Israel could choose to respond to Iran by trying to strike its military bases, nuclear sites, or energy facilities. It might also decide to carry out a sabotage attack, which is less likely to draw a strong reaction from Tehran.
“This may be where the Biden administration will intervene and truly rein in Israel,” said Scott Ritter, former U.S. Marine Intelligence Officer and UN Weapons Inspector. “If Israel attacks Iran’s oil-producing facilities, Tehran will do the same and target similar sites across the region. This would lead to global catastrophe and skyrocketing energy costs, especially in the West,” he told the Tehran Times, adding that current Vice President Kamala Harris would not have the chance to get elected as the next president if that happens.
Targeting Iranian nuclear sites will have unprecedented and devastating repercussions too, Ritter added. “I think Israelis will choose some military sites or decide to conduct sabotage attacks.”
Цитата:
‘Unilateral self-restraint has ended,’ Iran tells US in indirect message
...
TEHRAN - An Iranian source has told Al Jazeera that Tehran has sent a message to the United States via Qatar addressing the rising regional tensions.
In the message, Tehran told Washington that “the phase of unilateral self-restraint has ended.”
It also said any Israeli attack would meet an “unconventional response” that includes targeting Israeli infrastructure.
The indirect message also emphasized that Iran does not want a regional war, the official said.
In a meeting on Wednesday with a high-ranking delegation from the Palestinian Hamas resistance movement in Dohan, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reiterated Tehran’s position that the Islamic Republic will definitely give a “stronger and more crushing” response to Israel if it commits the “slightest” mistake.
The meeting came a day after the Islamic Republic carried out a retaliatory operation against Israel, dubbed Operation True Promise II.
Pezeshkian criticized Western countries for making empty promises, saying they requested Iran to exercise self-restraint and refrain from giving a response to the Israeli assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas political bureau chief, in Tehran on July 31 in exchange for establishing ceasefire in Gaza.
Therefore, "the continuation of the Zionist regime’s crimes made the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran to give a decisive response,” he added, Press TV reported.
The president condemned the atrocities perpetrated by Israel in Gaza and Lebanon, and lashed out at the United States and other Western countries for pursuing hypocritical approaches, saying they back Israel while claiming to advocate democracy and human rights.
Цитата:
An analysis of Operation 'True Promise II'
...
In an official statement from the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC), it was reported that these missile strikes are part of Operation "True Promise II," executed under the codename "Oh Messenger of God!" and directed against security and intelligence targets in Israel.
The IRGC issued its statement just minutes after the operation began, stating: “The great Islamic community, the noble and martyred Iranian nation, moments ago, after a period of restraint in the face of the violation of the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the assassination of the martyred fighter, Dr. Ismail Haniyeh, by the Zionist regime, and under the country's right to legitimate defense according to the United Nations Charter, has responded to the intensification of the regime's atrocities, supported by the United States in the massacre in Lebanon and Gaza. In this context, and in tribute to the martyrdom of the great fighter, leader of the Resistance Axis, and proud Secretary-General of Hezbollah, the martyr Hassan Nasrallah, as well as the brave commander and senior advisor of the IRGC in Lebanon, Major General Seyyed Abbas Nilforoushan, the IRGC Aerospace Force has launched dozens of ballistic missiles against key military and security targets in the heart of the occupied territories.”
The statement also warned that “this operation has been approved by the Supreme National Security Council and ordered by the General Staff of the Armed Forces, with the support of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Ministry of Defense. It is warned that if the Zionist regime responds militarily to this operation, which is in accordance with international law and the legitimate rights of the country, it will face devastating and crushing attacks.”
Simultaneously, Iran's representation at the UN issued another statement regarding the missile attack on the occupied territories, declaring that "Iran's legal, logical, and legitimate response to the terrorist actions of the Zionist regime, which targeted Iranian citizens and interests and violated the national sovereignty of the Islamic Republic, has been carried out."
According to several reports, this operation was conducted through the launch of ballistic missiles. Iranian local channels, citing sources from the IRGC, claimed that approximately 400 missiles were fired at military targets in Tel Aviv and its surroundings. Israeli media, for their part, reported that several Iranian missiles had been launched against targets located in the central and southern parts of the colonial entity.
Iranian media, citing sources close to the operation, claimed that “over 80% of the missiles in the first wave hit their intended targets." Additionally, it was reported that the headquarters of the Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, was completely destroyed in the attack, although this information has not yet been confirmed or denied by colonial authorities, who have prohibited any photographs showing the damage caused by the Iranian operation.
Another target of the Iranian missiles was the Negev Air Base, located in the southern part of the occupied territories. This base houses the two squadrons of fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets of the Israeli Air Force and was scheduled to receive a third squadron once more units were delivered. Iranian media sources have reported that the facility was "completely destroyed" during the attack.
Images from Israel confirm the impact of dozens of ballistic missiles that the country's air defenses, known as the “Iron Dome,” failed to intercept. The inability of the Iron Dome to intercept these missiles, evidenced in hundreds of online videos, is explained by military sources as a consequence of its design. This defense system was specifically conceived to intercept and neutralize short-range rockets and mortar shells, primarily launched from Gaza. In this context, it has proven effective, managing to intercept a high percentage of incoming threats.
However, when it comes to hypersonic missiles, which exceed the speed of Mach 5 and have highly maneuverable trajectories, no existing air defense system in the world, including the Iron Dome, offers credible deterrence. Hypersonic missiles present unique challenges due to their speed, unpredictability of trajectory, and ability to evade radar systems, making them an extremely difficult threat to counter with traditional defense technologies.
According to Iranian media, various types of missiles were used in Operation “True Promise II.” Among them are the Ghadr missiles, publicly unveiled in 2005 and available in three versions: the Ghadr-S, with a range of 1,350 km; the Ghadr-H, with 1,650 km; and the Ghadr-F, which reaches 1,950 km. Ballistic Emad missiles with a range of 1,700 km were also launched. Lastly, the IRGC employed the hypersonic Fattah-1 missile, which has a range of 1,400 km and a terminal velocity of Mach 13 to 15 (16,000 to 18,500 kilometers per hour).
In general terms, the operation reflects Iran's need to regain its “capability of threat” in the face of ongoing Israeli aggression, supported by the United States. In this regard, it is interesting to highlight an article published by the U.S. magazine Politico, which aligns with the liberal consensus, clarifying that there is a well-articulated plan between the U.S. and Israel to invade Lebanon and redraw the region.
Iran has made every effort to avoid falling into Zionist provocations, reiterating its intention to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza and asserting that it never sought to initiate a war that would jeopardize regional stability. However, the Islamic Republic is aware that Israel's genocidal escalation, both in Palestine and Lebanon, ultimately targets Iran and aims at the political redesign of the region—something that is politically and militarily untenable.
The Islamic Republic's restraint in the face of Zionist attacks also serves to challenge the prevailing narrative in the West that presents Iran as an irrational actor with unpredictable behavior. Accusations of "irrationality" against the Iranian government are closely linked to the idea that it seeks to export its revolution by force throughout the region and that its regional preference is chaos.
This discourse, which associates the Islamic Republic with violence and irrationality, was challenged by the manner in which the Iranian response unfolded. At a moment of heightened regional tension, generated by Israel's provocative behavior, Iran demonstrated a level of restraint and strategic vision that deserves highlighting. It is also relevant to point out a fundamental difference in how Iran and Israel manage the division between friends and enemies.
While Israel seeks to maximize casualties in each attack, doing everything possible not only to avoid them but also to increase them, Iran, as seen in this attack, has consciously avoided targeting what are considered "civilian" objectives (although in a colonial context such as Palestine, the category of “civilian” blurs, since all colonists benefit, to varying degrees, from the occupation).
The philosopher Walter Benjamin spoke of the difference between mythical violence and divine violence. The former seeks to secure power and maintain hierarchical divisions, while the latter aims to rehumanize the sanctity of life. It is not intended to suggest that Iran's response to Israeli violence fits within the category of “divine violence” as explained by Benjamin. However, it is important to note that even in a military conflict context, there are two distinct approaches to achieving objectives: on one hand, a cruel and brutal manner, and on the other, a restrained approach that shows respect for the lives of those who, in many cases, benefit from and support the genocidal colonial occupation of Palestine.
__________________________________________________________
С интересом и понятными пожеланиями, Dimitriy.
