Netanyahu's Gambit? A deep dive into the factors behind 'Operation Rising Lion'
Starting on June 13, 2025, Israel launched a massive attack on Iran. The unprovoked attack, which it labelled as `Operation Rising Lion,' was the culmination of tensions that had been building for decades. To understand why Israel carried out the attack, it is essential to examine several key historical, political and strategic factors that influence the relationship between the two countries. A handout picture provided by the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's office shows him waving during a ceremony on the occasion of 36rd death anniversary of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in Tehran on June 4, 2025. Khamenei vowed on June 18, 2025 that his country would show no mercy towards Israel's rulers, hours after US President Donald Trump demanded Tehran's "unconditional surrender". (Photo by KHAMENEI.IR / AFP)
Pre-Revolutionary Iran-Israel Relations
Before the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran, under the rule of King Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, had established good relations with Israel.
This situation arose due to the good relations between the Iranian government and the United States government, which, through its spy agency, the CIA and in collaboration with the British MI6, had carried out Operation Ajax in 1953 to overthrow the Iranian Prime Minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh and restore Mohammad Reza Shah to the throne after the latter had fled abroad.
Mossadegh had earlier nationalised Iran's oil industry, so the primary motives of the United States and Britain were to safeguard Western oil interests and counter the influence of the Soviet Union.
After 1953, the United States provided military aid to strengthen the Reza Shah Pahlavi regime while profiting from billions of dollars in sophisticated weapons sales to Iran, such as F-14 Tomcat fighter jets.
However, King Reza Shah's extravagant lifestyle, while most Iranians lived in poverty, made many dissatisfied with his rule.
An iron-fisted approach toward the people also characterised his rule.
Through the Savak intelligence agency, his regime arrested and tortured thousands of Iranians who dared to challenge his authority.
The growing dissatisfaction and hatred of the Iranian people eventually led to the violent revolution in 1979 that toppled him and forced him into exile to the US and later to Mexico, Panama and Egypt, where he eventually died.
Post-Revolution Attitude towards Israel
The previous good relations between King Reza Shah and the US gave rise to anti-American attitudes among Iranians during and after the revolution.
Iranians perceived the US as directly interfering in Iran's affairs and stealing its resources.
This attitude hardened during the post-revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran, led by Ayatollah Khomeini.
He severed diplomatic relations with the United States and Israel. Khomeini even called Israel the "little devil" and the United States the "great devil".
Indirect War
However, until very recently, Iran and Israel chose not to engage in any direct conflicts.
Instead, they were engaged in what can be called a `shadow war' where Iran will use proxies such as Hezbollah in Lebanon to attack Israel using weapons supplied by Iran.
Other proxies are Shiite militia movements in Iraq and Yemen.
Meanwhile, Israel also avoided attacking Iran directly before this. Instead, Israel only attacked through cyber warfare, such as the usage of the `Stuxnet virus' to undermine Iran's nuclear programme.
In addition, Israel was also believed to be behind the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in 2020.
Direct Conflict After October 2023
However, the conflict between the two countries became more intense following Hamas's Operation on October 7, 2023 and Hezbollah's launching of rockets and artillery attacks on Israeli positions in the Shebaa Farms and the Golan Heights, areas illegally occupied by Israel.
Hezbollah declared this action as an action to show "solidarity with the Palestinian people" and an effort to divert the focus of Israeli forces from Gaza.
Israel responded to the attack on September 27, 2024, by bombing Hezbollah's facilities on the outskirts of South Beirut, killing Hezbollah's prominent leader in Lebanon, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, along with several senior commanders.
With the death of Hasan Nasrallah, Iran was forced to show more support for Hezbollah by increasing the supply of weapons, including Falaq-2 rockets and kamikaze drones, which allowed Hezbollah to attack targets in central Israel, such as Haifa and Tel Aviv.
Israel continued to attack Lebanon, which resulted in the deaths of more than 3,000 Lebanese, including more than 2,000 Hezbollah fighters, while more than 13,000 people were injured.
Additionally, 1.2 million Lebanese were displaced, primarily those residing in southern Lebanon and Beirut.
In April 2024, Israel stepped up its attack on Iranian interests by bombing the Iranian embassy in Syria, which killed the commander of the Quds Force, Mohammad Reza Zahedi, forcing Iran to respond by launching missiles from Iranian territory into Israel.
However, whether intentionally or unintentionally, no Israeli was killed, and for more than a year after that, the situation between Iran and Israel calmed down.
However, on June 13, 2025, despite ongoing indirect negotiations between the US and Iran in Oman regarding its nuclear programme, Israel suddenly attacked Iran.
It killed several top Iranian military leaders and two nuclear scientists. It also attacked the Iranian nuclear facility complex in Natanz.
Israel's stated reason for its latest attack was to thwart Iran's efforts to develop a nuclear bomb, claiming that Iran now has enough material to build 15 nuclear bombs `in a matter of days' and was, therefore, a threat to Israel, a threat that needed to be eliminated immediately, a view that was not shared by many US leaders who felt that Iran would need many more years to develop a nuclear bomb.
Iran responded by attacking Israel with rockets and missiles.
The ensuing tit-for-tat actions over the following days have resulted in the deaths of more than 200 Iranians and more than 20 Israelis as of June 17, 2025. There is a strong possibility that the conflict will worsen due to the factors discussed below.
Domestic Political Factors in Israel
Many Israelis themselves believe that an essential factor why Benjamin Netanyahu decided to attack Iran was to ensure his well-being since he is currently facing corruption charges, which can lead to his being imprisoned.
However, by initiating a direct war with Iran, his trial will have to be postponed indefinitely.
Additionally, most Israelis also oppose his efforts to implement judicial reforms aimed at strengthening his political position.
His coalition government is currently very fragile and could collapse at anytime.
A few days before he ordered the attack on Iran, the Israeli parliament was almost dissolved.
The war with Iran will reduce the likelihood of the collapse of his government because it forces all Israelis to rally behind him to fight a common enemy.
Future Possible Scenario
The Iranian government has never been interested in directly attacking Israel because of the costs that the country will incur.
It also knows it cannot afford to continue the current war and is hoping Israel will stop its attacks. It has already stated that it is willing to stop its retaliatory attacks on Israel if Israel stops attacking it.
However, as stated above, Netanyahu is eager to continue the war in support of his agenda, even though he knows Israel cannot afford to continue the war.
Therefore, an integral part of Netanyahu's plan is to draw the US into the war, thereby reducing the burden of the war for Israel.
Moreover, Israel seems keen to affect a regime change in Iran by inflicting maximum damage on the country. They are hoping the Iranians who hate the Iranian government will seize the opportunity to take over the reins of power.
Currently, it is already using Iranian dissident groups within Iran which are opposed to the Iranian government to carry out bombing attacks on its behalf. The Iranian military has captured some of them.
Ordinary Iranians who hitherto had hated the Iranian government are now rallying behind it because of nationalistic sentiments.
Moreover, the deaths of hundreds of ordinary Iranians due to the Israeli bombings will serve to strengthen their support of the government. They will not help Israel to achieve its objective of `regime change'.
Implications for the Situation in Palestine
This conflict between Iran and Israel will not produce any sudden changes in Palestine. Israel continues to commit its crime of genocide in Gaza with impunity.
The world's attention that has been diverted to this conflict has made it easier for Israel to continue killing more Palestinians.
However, in the long run, this war will be detrimental to Israel because the perception among the American people towards Israel is increasingly negative.
Israel is seen as a country that is not only inhumane for killing women and children in Gaza, but it also likes to fight other countries.
Moreover, the recent statements by Netanyahu imploring the US to support Israeli in its current war with Iran are making more Americans, including those on the right wing of the political divide, be more vocal in warning Trump to remember his promise to his supporters that the US under him will not be involved in endless wars in far-flung places.
Notable figures like Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Green have made it their mission to stop the US from supporting Israel with weapons and money.
Most Americans, especially those who are suffering from cost-of-living problems, are increasingly disgusted with the fact that their money is being used to fund Israel to kill more innocent women and children in Iran and Palestine.
Conclusion
Israel's attack on Iran is the culmination of a decades-long conflict between the two countries.
Several factors contribute to what is happening, namely, Israel's concerns about Iran's nuclear weapons, Netanyahu's personal and political agenda, the struggle for regional influence through proxies and the failure of international diplomacy. In the short run, both Iran and Israel will suffer huge losses from this war.
However, in the long run, Israel will suffer more due to the erosion of support from the American public.
Many Americans, including among the right-wingers, are disgusted with Netanyahu's instigation to get America to be involved in the war and continue to support its endless wars against neighbouring countries. Since the ability of the Israeli military depends entirely on support from the United States, any reduction in American support for Israel will mean that the chances of the Palestinians being free from the oppressive Zionist grip on them will become brighter.
From this perspective, despite the tragedy of the loss of so many innocent lives, the ongoing war between Iran and Israel is good for the future of Palestine.
Emeritus Professor Mohd Nazari Ismail is the director of Hashim Sani Centre for Palestine Studies at Business and Economics Faculty of Universiti Malaya. The opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Sinar Daily.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Barnama
an hour ago
- Barnama
Geneva Meeting Begins In Bid To Halt Escalating Israel-Iran Conflict
GENEVA, June 20 (Bernama-Anadolu) -- A crucial international meeting aimed at halting the hostilities between Israel and Iran began Friday in Geneva, marking the start of an intensive two-week diplomatic effort to prevent a wider conflict in the Middle East. British Foreign Secretary David Lammy, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot, and German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul are holding talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to address Tehran's nuclear activities and identify potential diplomatic off-ramps to avoid escalation. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas is also attending the meeting, according to Anadolu Ajansi.
New Straits Times
2 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Bigger mess awaits if regime change happens in Iran
ISRAEL increasingly appears eager to oust the leadership that has ruled Iran since the 1979 Islamic revolution but is taking a gamble given the Iranian opposition is divided and there is no guarantee new rulers would be any less hardline, say analysts. By striking targets other than nuclear or ballistic facilities, such as Iran's IRIB broadcaster, expectations have grown that Israel has goals beyond degrading Iranian atomic and missile capabilities and eyes removing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But while United States President Donald Trump has warned "we know" where Khamenei "is hiding", what would follow his removal after over 3½ decades in power is shrouded in uncertainty and risk. European leaders are haunted by the aftermath of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the Nato-led intervention in Libya in 2011. They resulted in the removal of dictators Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi but also in years of bloody mayhem in both countries. "The biggest mistake today is to seek regime change in Iran through military means because that would lead to chaos," said French President Emmanuel Macron at the end of the G7 summit in Canada. "Does anyone think that what was done in Iraq in 2003... or what was done in Libya the previous decade was a good idea? No!" he said. Analysts say ousting Khamenei and his fellow leaders risks creating a vacuum that could be filled by hardline elements in the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) ideological force or the Iranian military. "Israel's strikes seem more focused on regime change than non-proliferation," said Nicole Grajewski, fellow at the Carnegie Endowment. "Of course, Israel is targeting ballistic missile and military related facilities but they are also targeting leadership and symbols of the regime like the IRIB. "If the regime were to fall, the hope would be for a liberal and democratic government. "However, there is a strong likelihood that other powerful entities like the IRGC could emerge as the replacement," she said. Among the highest-profile opposition figures is the US-based Reza Pahlavi, the son of ousted shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. He has declared that the Islamic republic is "on the verge of collapse", accusing Khamenei of "hiding underground" like a "frightened rat". Pahlavi has long called for the restoration of the warm relationship that existed between his late father and Israel, to reverse the Islamic republic's refusal to recognise the existence of Israel. Monarchists would like such a rapprochement to be termed the "Cyrus Accords" after the ancient Persian king credited with freeing the Jews from Babylon. But Pahlavi is far from enjoying universal support inside Iran or among exiles. The nationalism of supporters and his ties with Israel are divisive, especially after he refused to condemn the Israeli airstrikes on Iran. Another major organised group is the People's Mujahedin (MEK), whose leader Maryam Rajavi told the European Parliament on Wednesday: "The people of Iran want the overthrow of this regime." But the MEK is despised by other opposition factions and regarded with suspicion by some Iranians for its support of Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war. "Part of the challenge in thinking about alternatives to the Islamic Republic in case it collapses is that there is no organised, democratic alternative," said Thomas Juneau, professor at the University of Ottawa. He said while Pahlavi "who has by far the most name recognition both in and out of Iran", his supporters "tend to exaggerate his support inside the country". "The only alternative — and this is among the worrying scenarios — is a coup d'etat by the Revolutionary Guards or changing from a theocracy to a military dictatorship." Analysts also warn that a potential — and often overlooked — factor for future instability could be Iran's complex ethnic make-up. Large Kurdish, Arab, Baluch and Turkic minorities coexist alongside the Persian population. Analysts at the US-based think tank Soufan Centre said with the survival of the Iranian regime now viewed as a "strategic failure", the prospect of an "Iraq 2.0" is looming. "The post-regime-change scenario remains unpredictable and could trigger regional destabilisation on a scale greater than Iraq, with global ramifications," they said.
The Sun
2 hours ago
- The Sun
PDRM's terrorism response garners global recognition
KUALA LUMPUR: The Royal Malaysia Police's (PDRM) capability in tackling terrorism threats has not only been recognised at the regional level but also by global powers such as the United States, says Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail. He said this was evident in the trust placed by the US in PDRM's expertise to carry out the rehabilitation of two Malaysian detainees previously held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 'This shows that in this particular case, the PDRM's Special Branch possesses expertise and competence that convinced a major power like the United States. 'It means we can stand as equals in efforts to address terrorism threats so they do not pose a danger within our own country,' he said during the handover ceremony of the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) post at the Police Training Centre (Pulapol) here today. Media reports previously stated that the US had repatriated two Malaysian citizens in December 2024, after they had been detained at Guantanamo Bay for 18 years. The two individuals involved, Mohammed Farik Amin, 49, and Mohammed Nazir Lep, 48, are currently undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation process that includes social support services, welfare assistance, and health screening before being reunited with their families. Saifuddin said it was crucial for the country to have a capable IGP, such as the 14th IGP Tan Sri Razarudin Husain, who played a key role in the repatriation of the two men. He praised Razarudin's composure when engaging with various US agencies, including the CIA and FBI, in resolving the matter. Meanwhile, Saifuddin stressed that the appointment of an IGP was not an award but a responsibility and burden that must be shouldered with full accountability. He said this was because the IGP was not only accountable to the nation but also to the entire police force under his leadership. Earlier at the ceremony, Bukit Aman Special Branch director Datuk Seri Mohd Khalid Ismail was officially appointed as the 15th IGP, succeeding Razarudin, effective today. The handover ceremony was witnessed by Saifuddin and attended by Communications Minister Datuk Fahmi Fadzil and senior PDRM officers.
