Experts acknowledge that the Israeli bombing of the Iranian consular office in Damascus on April 1 was the first shot in a new phase of the regional conflict between the two countries.

The attack, which claimed the lives of several senior Iranian military officials, including General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, moved the conflict from a proxy war to a direct confrontation.

Iran launched its long-expected response to Israel last Saturday, targeting Israel with hundreds of drones and ballistic missiles. According to Israeli and American claims, most of the attacks, the targets of which the Iranians were said to have sent (to the Turkish intermediary, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan) in the previous days as part of back-channel negotiations between the United States and Iran, were intercepted on their way to Israel.

The United States, Israel's patron and closest partner, also announced that it was not involved or aware of the planning of the attack on the consulate. Following the Iranian response this weekend, which caused very limited damage, the United States warned against escalation, encouraging Israel to see the destruction of 99% of the missiles as a tactical victory and an end to the current confrontation.

Experts believe that the mutual strikes between Israel and Iran have pushed the Middle East into dangerously uncharted waters, at a time when many American policymakers are seeking to push to leave the region and refocus attention on Europe and East Asia.

Despite calls from the Biden administration to seek a diplomatic way out, Israeli officials are promising an escalating response to Iran. They threaten to target military sites inside Iran, in addition to sites linked to the country's nuclear program, which is a long-term Israeli obsession.

The Iranians said that continuing this cycle of strikes would lead to another tit-for-tat attack against Israel, on a much larger scale and unlikely to be coordinated with the United States or other regional powers to minimize damage. The result could be a large-scale war between two powerful countries, and strong and overt American protection of Israel to ensure its security. In light of this, the United States is less likely to turn toward Asia, or even fully recommit to defending Ukraine.

Washington is trying to show that Israel makes its decisions independently of American desires or directives, with an NBC News report on Sunday quoting three officials close to President Joe Biden as saying that the president “privately expressed concern that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to drag Washington into a broader conflict.

According to experts, despite Biden's concerns, it was the United States that created a moral hazard by encouraging Israel to act more recklessly. Israel's decision to attack the Iranian consulate building, killing a number of senior officials in the elite Quds Force, is unlikely to have happened without Netanyahu's belief that he could count on American support no matter what Israel does.

It is noteworthy that before the attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus on April 1, and the Iranian response on April 13, sudden American shifts appeared regarding the war in Gaza, and Biden seemed to reject further Israeli strikes against Iran, but American officials, including the president, expressed Pretty much the tone of full and unwavering support for Israel. Although this support did not always extend to Netanyahu himself, the strike against Damascus appears to be a test of this distinction.

The violent exchange with Iran also highlights a much wider gap between the interests of the United States, Israel, and the leaders of the two countries. The United States has material incentives to reduce its focus on the Middle East and does not want to fight another major war in the region, but for Israel and for Netanyahu personally, there are strong reasons to begin a direct confrontation with Iran and its allies.

It is noteworthy that since the start of its attack on the besieged Gaza Strip on October 7, 2023, most Israeli civilians have left the northern region of the country due to the presence of fighters from the Iranian-backed Hezbollah armed group across the Lebanese border. Many Israeli security officials feel that war with Hezbollah, and by extension Iran, is inevitable. They favor the strategy of starting now on Israel's terms while the United States still has a military presence in the region that can be forced to fight alongside Israel.

In Netanyahu's view, once the current war ends, he will likely face serious political and legal problems inside Israel. Expanding the conflict into a regional conflict could delay his day of reckoning — or even change his personal fortunes entirely.

Experts believe that Israel's incentives for war with Iran would logically put it on a collision course with the American political establishment. But the deep ideological, economic, and political ties that Israel's supporters have cultivated with American politicians and security elites make it possible that the United States could end up in war with Iran, whether they like it or not.

It will not be easy, as Iran, a country with a vast area three times the size of Iraq and boasting vastly more advanced defenses and a huge network of regional military assets, will quickly shift the war to include American interests and those of Washington's allies in the region.

Despite the demonstration of American power that shot down (according to its claim) Iranian missiles and drones over Jordan and Iraq, it faces real military problems, from a lack of ammunition and funding to support Ukraine, and is anxiously monitoring the Chinese military buildup in East Asia, it is difficult to think of a worse timing for such a thing. Conflict according to experts.