WANA (Jun 24) – In analyzing Israel’s surprise attack on Iranian territory on Friday, June 13, five major strategic miscalculations stand out as key factors that escalated the conflict. These misjudgments not only led to a strategic setback for Tel Aviv but also shifted the regional balance in Tehran’s favor.

 

1. False Hope for a Domestic Uprising

Israel assumed that an aerial assault would ignite public unrest within Iran. The expectation was that discontented masses would flood the streets, destabilizing the regime under internal pressure. But the public response defied this calculation: not only was there no uprising, in some instances, national unity actually deepened in the face of external aggression.

 

2. Underestimating Iran’s Military Power

Although the initial strikes inflicted some damage on Iranian military and defense infrastructure, the country’s overall defense system remained intact. Within days, Iran launched nearly 2,000 missiles and drones toward Israel. This retaliation showcased not only Tehran’s substantial capacity to produce and deploy advanced weaponry, but also evoked parallels to conflicts like the war in Yemen—where heavy bombardment failed to break the will to resist. Israel’s inability to mount any meaningful ground operation against a vast and mountainous country like Iran further exposed its strategic vulnerability.

 

3. Ignoring Global and Regional Public Sentiment

Israel gravely misread the psychological and political climate of the region. The attack occurred while Tehran and Washington were engaged in ongoing diplomatic talks, which led many countries to perceive Israel’s move not as a preemptive defense, but as outright aggression. Public opinion across the Muslim world turned sharply against Tel Aviv, and some governments even issued statements of support for Iran—marking a significant diplomatic defeat for Israel.

 

4. Overlooking Its Own Vulnerabilities

With a landmass just one-eightieth the size of Iran and densely populated cities lacking strategic depth, Israel is acutely vulnerable to missile strikes. The Iron Dome defense system also struggled to intercept Iran’s long-range and precision-guided missiles. While Israel’s attacks had limited impact on daily life in Iran, Iranian missile barrages disrupted life across Israeli cities and spread widespread fear.

 

5. Forgetting the Golden Rule of War

History offers a consistent lesson: the side that starts a war often ends up losing it. From Nazi Germany in World War II to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and even Israel in Lebanon—initiators of conflicts have frequently faced defeat or withdrawal. In this case too, Israel’s assault lacked international legitimacy and only strengthened national unity within Iran, while garnering increased external support for Tehran’s stance. This shift has further destabilized Israel’s strategic position in the region.