Israel, through direct military attacks on Iran, the assassination of senior military commanders and nuclear scientists, and missile strikes on defensive, military, and nuclear facilities, has effectively violated the established principles of international law. These actions constitute not only a clear breach of the UN Charter but also a direct assault on Iran’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity.
Strategically, Israel’s attacks are a calculated attempt to destabilize West Asia. Such actions risk intensifying the regional arms race, increasing the likelihood of direct military confrontation among regional powers, spreading conflict to critical international waterways including the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, and undermining the regional order based on cooperation and collective security. These developments serve only the interests of extremist global actors seeking to inflame sectarian and ethnic hostilities in the region.
By crossing Iran’s security red lines and repeatedly provoking resistance forces, Israel is edging dangerously close to strategic ruin. Acts such as the targeted killings of scientists and the destruction of defense infrastructure cannot be justified under the framework of preemptive warfare; rather, under international law, they are acts of aggression that could subject Israeli leaders to criminal prosecution under the statutes of the International Criminal Court.
Militarily, the continued aggression without a strong and effective response has fostered a false sense of immunity in the Israeli regime and has shifted the deterrence equation to Iran’s disadvantage.
If Operation “True Promise III” had gone beyond mere rhetoric and instead included effective field destruction of key Israeli strategic assets, precision targeting of Zionist military, intelligence, and nuclear sites, the use of electronic warfare, suicide drones, and precision missiles to cripple critical infrastructure—alongside synchronized pressure from resistance fronts in the north and south—it could have established a credible deterrent for Iran. The absence of such decisive actions and excessive caution have instead signaled weakness to the enemy, encouraging further criminal provocations.
Iran must adopt an active deterrence doctrine, responding with symmetrical, targeted, and destructive measures. This response could involve missile and drone strikes on airbases, command centers, nuclear facilities, the national power grid, air defense systems, and key intelligence sites within Israel.
Simultaneously, Iran must clearly document and present Israel’s violations of international law to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice. In parallel, a media campaign and diplomatic pressure must be launched against supporters of Zionism to halt political and military aid, forming a soft-power front against aggression.
Moreover, Iran should explicitly declare that any future attack on its military or nuclear personnel or facilities will be met with an immediate, widespread, and geographically unrestricted response. This redefinition of red lines will revive a balance of fear—an essential foundation for effective deterrence.
However, while these measures address short-term defense, for long-term and sustainable national security, developing a nuclear weapon remains the most critical deterrent against an enemy that already possesses such arms.
Today, Iran stands at a pivotal point where mere warnings and inaction no longer suffice—they endanger national security. Israel’s attacks on Iranian military installations and scientists are not isolated operations; they constitute a declaration of war. Only a real, devastating response can alter the dynamics of this conflict and restore Iran’s national security, pride, and regional authority. If Israelis insist on playing with fire, they must fear a blaze that will no longer be controllable
