On Iran – Harel in Haaretz:

‘Besides, many of the experts in the security establishment support the new understandings and view them as the least of the evils. Some of the leading figures in the professional cadre, including former director of Military Intelligence, Maj. Gen. Tamir Hayman and his successor, Maj. Gen. Aharon Haliva, were also against the Israeli move in 2018 that pushed U.S. President Donald Trump to withdraw from the nuclear agreement that had been signed three years earlier.

Brig. Gen. Oren Setter closely followed the twists and turns of the Iranian affair for almost two decades. Setter, who last month completed three years as head of the Strategic Division in the Israel Defense Forces’ General Staff and almost 30 years of service in the IDF, held key positions in the Strategy Directorate, Military Intelligence, the Directorate of Defense Research and Development and other intelligence bodies.’

(…)

‘Perhaps, Setter says, there is something to the American way of thinking, expressed by President Theodore Roosevelt when he spoke of the need to walk softly and carry a big stick. “Part of formulating the strategy is understanding the motives of the other sides. On the Iranian side, there is a deep feeling that when the Americans withdrew from the agreement, they were tricked. The previous agreement did not protect them at all from an American withdrawal. There is a deep Iranian feeling that that wasn’t fair. From their point of view, they fulfilled the terms of the agreement and were shafted. Their dignity was affronted and therefore they will cope with tremendous economic difficulties and will not give in. That’s why the pressure on them didn’t work.’

(…)

‘“In recent months there has been an Iranian attempt to undermine the regional alliance against them. They are working for rapprochement with the Sunni Arab countries and to reduce hostility toward them, partly in response to the Abraham Accords. Not one country in the region changed its basic opinion on Iran. The Sunni-Shiite rift exists. But the war in Yemen exacted a steep price from the Gulf states, and they are trying to abate tensions. Everyone is talking with everyone. There are a lot more hues in the Middle East now. Contrariwise, the Iranian threat to us has become broader, multidimensional. If the regime there does not fall, they will be our enemies for the coming decades.”’

(…)

‘“From my angle, as a professional, things were always presented in full to the decision-makers. In 2015, I presented the nuclear agreement to the security cabinet for almost two hours. From my experience, all told, the discussion was very substantive. I completely accept that the political decision-makers sometimes have information that we don’t, for example during the Abraham Accords negotiations, we didn’t understand the full picture. There is also a political understanding of how the public sees things.’

(…)

‘Setter does not accept the analysis that has been voiced frequently in Israel over the past few months, to the effect that we are now witnessing a process in which the United States is pulling out of the Middle East. “There is no such event,” he says. “In the American order of priorities, Russia is now an acute threat to security, and China is a threatening long-term competitor. If I were in their shoes, those would be my priorities, too. They are not on the way out. They understand that if they leave the region to its own devices, that will bounce back to affect them. I told them more than once: ‘The Middle East is the opposite of Las Vegas – what happens here doesn’t stay here.’’

(…)

‘The Abraham Accords, he believes, increased the potential for military cooperation with the Gulf states, including those with which Israel doesn’t yet have diplomatic relations with. “We need to approach this cautiously and gradually. Things take time. There won’t be a regional defense pact here, or NATO. But joint coordination between the air defense systems can serve everyone. CENTCOM is critical for that. Things are moving ahead, in part because it’s an American interest.”’

Read the article here.

This seems to be a rather rational approach to a conflict that could become a war without all the propaganda mud that is so hard to digest.

The approach remains: negotiations with the threat of major violence. And some minor violence on the side.

Israel is busy convincing the US that abandoning the Middle East is a grave mistake. After all, what happens there doesn’t stay there.

The military establishment (in Israel and probable elsewhere) doesn’t always understand the political establishment. In a very polite way Mr. Setter said that they can be a bunch of idiots.

The Sunni Shia friendship is a something purely tactical, at least that’s what Israel is hoping.
For the US, China and Russia first, but the Middle East will be the battleground. So, don’t leave it to its own devices.

Also, the war in Ukraine was a great opportunity for Iran to test its drones.
This war was and is a great opportunity for many manufacturers to test a few weapon systems.