[Text by Aris Rousinos, Translation by Whale Life]

In international affairs, a week can change everything: it can even completely destroy an entire set of political beliefs.

Just over a week ago, President Trump clearly stated that he did not support Netanyahu's decision to go to war with Iran, and he desired for the United States to stay out of it. This was a restrained statement typical of Trump, which was also the core of his re-election campaign and deeply supported by his base voters; these voters had long been thoroughly disgusted with the costly, repeatedly failed "permanent wars" in the Middle East that the United States had been involved in.

Indeed, during his landmark speech in Riyadh in May, Trump had criticized the neoconservatives and liberal interventionists. These people's arguments for intervening in the Middle East were nothing more than unfounded assumptions and blind faith in America's ability to transform foreign societies through power, resulting in the waste of countless blood and wealth without any positive outcomes.

Trump claimed: "In the end, those so-called 'nation-builders' have destroyed far more countries than they have built - and the interventionists are meddling in complex societies they know absolutely nothing about."

Trump's voters shared the same view: less than a quarter of Republican voters supported American involvement in this war initiated by Netanyahu; yet, the strongest advocates of this war were actually the "Never-Trumpers" among the neoconservatives - those who had described Trump himself as a dictator to be overthrown over the past decade.

Nevertheless, Israel attacked Iran's chief negotiator to the U.S.; thus, the "America First" anti-interventionist stance was instantly discarded. For reasons still to be guessed by the outside world, Trump suddenly changed his mind. By ordering the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities, he fulfilled Netanyahu's decades-long wish. At the same time, he at least temporarily rescued Netanyahu from the short-term dilemma he had created himself.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu posted a video on social media speaking about thanking Trump for ordering the air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Screenshot from social media

The war launched by Israeli leaders has no clearly defined end goal, and its opponent is a distant, larger, and more populous country - the geographical conditions of Iran make it completely fearless of ground invasion.

With excellent frontline intelligence capabilities combined with long-range aerial strike capabilities, Israel has indeed achieved specific results in eliminating Iranian military leadership and weakening its ballistic missile capability, but has not completely destroyed Iran's military capability.

In fact, on the 22nd, Iran launched the most effective ballistic missile attack against Israel so far, while Israel's intercepting missile reserves are rapidly being depleted. Iran is directly attacking Israel's most sensitive and heavily defended locations - something that was almost unimaginable last year, but now happens multiple times a day.

Wars initiated by Israel have always been short, preemptive strikes aimed at quickly defeating enemies who would gain the upper hand in a prolonged conflict. This war is no exception.

Israeli leadership initially pleaded for direct American involvement (despite being once rejected by Trump), which itself admitted a fact: Netanyahu had started a conflict that Israel alone could not end. As scholar Emma Ashford of American international relations pointed out, Israel's move is a classic case of trying to "drag down an ally" found outside the textbooks of international relations theory.

However, for Israel, the rational choice was to drag a powerful America into this war. As noted by Richard Pape, a distinguished scholar in the field of air power, Israel is attempting something no one has successfully done before: overthrowing a regime solely through air power.

Although there is always a first time, Pape pointed out that Israel's excessive confidence in the power of its advanced weapons may instead result in "strengthening Iran's determination, leading to results contrary to its intended goals: a more dangerous Iran with nuclear weapons."

Regardless of whether Iran decides to retaliate directly against the United States (which would also risk a full-scale war Iran cannot afford), it will almost certainly withdraw from all external oversight mechanisms regarding its nuclear program and stop any substantive diplomatic engagement with this fickle and proven unreliable superpower.

As Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi, hurriedly heading to Moscow for support, said: "Last week, we were negotiating with the United States when Israel decided to destroy that diplomatic effort. This week, we were holding talks with the E3/EU, and the United States decided to bomb this diplomatic effort. What conclusion would you draw?"

Iran's cautious and elderly Supreme Leader Khamenei had long resisted the idea of possessing nuclear weapons, but now he faces not only the threat of assassination through targeted killings by Israel, but also a likely serious threat from the younger radical faction within his own regime.

Diplomacy has proven futile and has even directly caused harm; at the same time, Iran's cautious approach to acquiring nuclear weapon capabilities has been proven a strategic disaster.

Short term, Iran is striving to resist Israel's multi-pronged attacks and may be unable to respond directly to the U.S. air strikes.

However, regardless of whether the U.S. (as revealed by sources within the Iranian regime) gave prior warning of the air strikes, or whether Iran successfully transferred nuclear materials from the target areas beforehand, in the long run, the logic of the development of events will force Iran and its regional adversaries, such as Turkey, to acquire nuclear weapon capabilities as quickly and secretly as possible outside of international supervision.

MAXER satellite image shows a row of heavy trucks waiting outside the Fordow nuclear facility in Iran on June 20th, local time, before the U.S. air strikes. Social media

If the Iranian regime is facing a dilemma, the United States is also in the same boat - it is now urging the resumption of nuclear negotiations that were abruptly interrupted by the Israeli bombing.

Vice President Vance claimed, "We are not at war with Iran, we are at war with Iran's nuclear program," which can be interpreted as a long-time critic of U.S. interference in the Middle East trying to ease the situation - aiming to limit Iran's retaliation to symbolic levels and get all parties back on the negotiation track.

In fact, just a few days ago, Reuters cited Vance saying, "The U.S. should not get directly involved," and hinted that "the Israelis are trying to pull the U.S. into the war." He was right on both counts.

As observed by international relations scholar Stephen Wertheim, who opposes interventionism, Israel's actions "are more about preemptively preventing American diplomatic efforts than preemptively preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons" - and on this goal, Israel has succeeded completely.

The Trump administration has pursued a policy that may accelerate Iran's nuclear program and remove international supervision, effectively crossing a red line that previous U.S. administrations had tried hard to avoid crossing.

Those advocating regime change will now fabricate evidence that a single air strike did not meet expectations; soon, they will present newly emerged, supposedly "very urgent" objectives and demand further U.S. bombing.

The U.S. will now be dragged into a cycle of military interventions, trying to eliminate Iran's nuclear program like "mowing the lawn"; the "intelligence" supporting this intervention will inevitably be vague, speculative, and politically controversial - especially among the increasingly conspiracy-minded, anti-interventionist populist right in the U.S.

Vance is both an admirer of these non-mainstream right-wing forces in the U.S. and a product of their political rise. He surely understands that a dangerous backlash against the American Jewish community (and even Israel itself) is brewing within the populist right wing - a threat much greater than the pro-Palestinian leftists who have so far captured their attention.

But for Israel and its friendly lobbyists in Washington, that is a problem for the future: so far, the U.S. strategic restraint faction and the "America First" faction have suffered setbacks, while the neoconservatives and "Never-Trumpers" are celebrating joyfully.

They do have reason to celebrate: Netanyahu's deep-rooted gambling habits have once again paid off - he successfully pulled the anti-interventionist Trump administration into a long-term military confrontation with Iran, which goes against its repeated public statements.

This Israeli strongman, despite facing a series of corruption charges domestically and an international court arrest warrant for war crimes abroad, has proven that he is the most influential figure in the U.S. foreign policy circle, far surpassing the U.S. Vice President himself.

Netanyahu may not be able to install a pro-Israel new regime in Tehran, but it has proven that making Washington comply with his will is a much easier task.

However, just as the impact on Iran, as the events of the past week continue to ferment in U.S. political turbulence, the long-term consequences for Tel Aviv and its supporters in Washington may be less satisfying than the short-term gains. The Israeli government's overt use of the "Trump card" to achieve short-term goals means that in the game of the next few years, they will hold a weaker hand.

(Original article published on the British UnHerd comment website, titled: "Netanyahu has played his 'Trump card'.") The translation is provided for readers' reference only and does not represent the views of Observers Network.

This article is an exclusive contribution from Observer, and the content is purely the personal opinion of the author, not representing the platform's views. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited, otherwise legal responsibility will be pursued. Follow the WeChat account guanchacn of Observer to read interesting articles every day.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7519774187767841290/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author. Please express your attitude below using the [Up/Down] buttons.