The Most Complex Phases of the American-Israeli Operation ‘Epic Fury’ Are Yet to Come

In the first few days of military operations against the Iranian regime the USA and Israel achieved the easiest goal – an indisputable military victory. What was surprising was how much the military strength of the Iranian regime was a paper tiger. Within the first three days, it launched about twenty percent of its ballistic missiles, most of which did not reach their targets, while in the meantime, the American and Israeli armies incapacitated a significant part of its military potential: both in armaments and command personnel. In the first wave of attacks, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was eliminated in his super-secret shelter during a meeting with the highest military officials and commanders, including the Minister of Defense and the commander of the ground forces.

In a series of targeted attacks, the Iranian armed forces were commandingly decapitated, and the system of deep resilience, according to which every commander was supposedly required to appoint four of his (mostly secret) deputies, collapsed. The armed forces that brutally eliminated about thirty thousand protesters against the theocratic Islamic regime on the streets of Iran just weeks ago proved to be completely inferior – technologically and in intelligence – to the American and Israeli armies.

French ​Salto Mortale

However, the most complex phases of the American-Israeli operation ‘Epic Fury’, aimed at regime change in Iran and the creation of a new geopolitical map of the Middle East – are yet to come. They involve much more uncertainty and risk than mere physical destruction of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. The first risk that supporters of the American-Israeli military intervention have warned about from the outset is the developed propaganda activities of Iranian services in the public space of Western democracies, which do not have the practice of simply shutting down the internet.

The goal is as follows: to turn Western public opinion, especially American, against the intervention. This involves spreading doubts about the legality of the intervention (is it in accordance with international law?), spreading distrust towards American and Israeli leadership (division at the top of the US, Trump has a rash on his neck and a bruise on his arm, Trump is crazy and unpredictable, Netanyahu is leading Trump, leading American soldiers to death, etc.); it includes threats in words and actions to security in the West (terrorist actions), deterring potential allies…

Nevertheless, it seems that convincing American-Israeli dominance in the first days of the operation has significantly narrowed the space for Iranian propaganda warfare (although it has not completely closed it, as seen in Croatian media), motivating Western allies to seek ways to join the operation, and previous Iranian sponsors, primarily China and Russia, to remain reserved for the time being.

Thus, we witnessed a French political ​salto mortale over the weekend​: on Saturday, the French called for an urgent meeting of the UN Security Council and a ceasefire, and by Monday, they were discussing ways to join the operation with the UK and Germany. In the public space, this revived the memory of the sarcastic remark regarding the proverbial ​French ​war engagement: ‘Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without a accordion,’ attributed to American General Norman Schwarzkopf, commander of Desert Storm in 1990.

Unexpectedly enthusiastically (especially after the Iranian attacks), the most powerful states of the Arabian Peninsula (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait) supported the American-Israeli operation. The interest in partnership in the operation arises from political pragmatism – thus buying a ticket for a role in the future geopolitical architecture of the Middle East, which is the ultimate goal of the operation. To achieve this, a change of the Iranian regime, the establishment of a new, pro-Western regime, and a stable state are necessary. This is also the most difficult and uncertain part of the operation.

And After UDBA – UDBA

So far, it has been evident that Israeli and American intelligence services have seriously penetrated (‘drilled’) the institutions of the Iranian theocratic regime. But is that enough to provoke a regime change from within and its new geopolitical orientation while maintaining state stability? We will have to wait and see. It is most likely that this change is being prepared and implemented with parts of the existing Iranian state apparatus. Colloquially, and after UDBA – UDBA.

And one should not expect that in this operation, the previously hidden China and Russia, as well as some other Iranian allies, will stand idly by. If the change succeeds, we will get a new security map of the Middle East, with dominant Israeli-American influence, but also with completely, or almost completely, ousted European (British, French) political influence. And if it fails? Well, then things get complicated…