Dr. Hassan Marhej: The Iranian response is inevitable and will be a wake-up call for the new US administration

Fares Sarfandi: Iran is obligated to respond to maintain its deterrent power after the end of the strategic patience phase

Ismail Al-Muslimmani: The arrival of B-52 bombers to the region is part of American efforts to protect Israel and send a warning to Iran

Dr. Abdullah Nehme: The increasing military escalation is a result of targeting one of the fuel components in the Iranian nuclear reactor

The chances of a direct confrontation between Iran and Israel have recently increased after media reports revealed that Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei instructed the Supreme National Security Council to prepare to attack Israel, while reports indicate statements by Israeli officials that Israel is prepared to launch more direct attacks on Iran, if necessary. Meanwhile, fears of the region slipping into an open war are heightened by the arrival of American B-52 bombers, which can carry nuclear warheads and travel long distances without needing to refuel, reflecting an unusual American readiness for a confrontation that could be comprehensive.

The New York Times quoted three Iranian officials as saying that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued his instructions after reviewing a detailed report from senior military commanders on the extent of the damage to Iran’s missile production capabilities, air defense systems around Tehran, vital energy infrastructure, and a major port in the south.

“The scope of the Israeli attack, as well as the number of casualties, was so great that it could not be ignored, and not responding would mean admitting defeat,” the New York Times quoted Iranian officials as saying. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that “military leaders were preparing a list of dozens of military targets inside Israel, but the attacks were likely to occur after the U.S. election, because Iran was concerned that another wave of tension and chaos in the region could benefit Republican Party candidate Donald Trump.”

Writers and analysts who spoke to "I" believe that the Iranian response is inevitable and will be a wake-up call for the new US administration, as Iran is obligated to respond to the Israeli attack to maintain its deterrent power after the end of the strategic patience phase. They also pointed out that the arrival of US B-52 bombers to the region increases the chances of an imminent confrontation, while others believe that the arrival of these bombers carries two messages: the first to Israel that America is committed to protecting it and that it is unable to protect itself without US support, and the second is a stern warning to Iran, and therefore America is not seeking to slide into an open and comprehensive war.

Iranian response scenarios

Dr. Hassan Marhej, an expert in Middle Eastern affairs, said: First, it must be noted that the Israeli targeting of Iran was clear from the beginning that Iran would respond, as part of establishing the equation of deterrence and counter-deterrence, and then came the statements of the Iranian leader to confirm that Tehran is preparing to respond to Israel, and this opens the door to interpretations of the response scenarios, which can be summarized in four scenarios.

As for the first scenario, according to Marhej, it can be said that Tehran’s announcement of closing its airspace before the US elections may be a preparation for a direct and major response against Israel. Here, too, it can be said that Tehran is directly saying that any future US president will have no influence on Iran’s future options. In the same context, it is a message to pressure the United States in order to force Israel to stop the war in Lebanon, Palestine, and the region in general.

The second scenario is that the Iranian response could come on the eve of the US elections, and the White House administration and the US military establishment are busy securing the elections, and thus we may witness an Iranian response to Israel at this time.

Regarding the third scenario, Marhej says: I believe that Iran’s response could be after the end of the US elections and knowing the winner, whether it is Trump or Harris. Iran’s response after knowing the winner includes political messages that it will not remain silent about any violation of its sovereignty under any international circumstances, and militarily to say that Iran has the military capabilities that enable it to respond to any regional or international power, and that it enjoys broad and influential influence and that the US should not provoke Iran further, and that any targeting will be responded to strongly and influentially.

As for the fourth scenario, Marhej points out that it can be said, regardless of the above, that the Iranian response will be of the same level as the Iranian response in April and October, and Iran realizes that its response will restore the deterrence equation to its correct place. Accordingly, and within the above givens, the Iranian response will be a political and military means to restore the concepts of deterrence. Whether Trump or Harris wins, what awaits them is Iran and its political and military ability to control the concepts of conflict.

Dr. Marhej stressed that the Iranian response is inevitable, whether before or after the American elections, but the response will be a wake-up call for the new American administration, and it must deal with Iran on the principle of equals.

The response is a means of confirming Iran's continued military cohesion.

In turn, the journalist specializing in Iranian affairs, Fares Sarfandi, confirmed that the Islamic Republic of Iran is now obligated to respond to any Israeli attacks, as it is keen to maintain its deterrent power after announcing the end of the phase of strategic patience.

Sarfandi pointed out that following the Iranian response to the assassination of Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, Iran explicitly declared that any future Israeli aggression would be met with a stronger response.

He said that Iran sees the response as a way to confirm its continued military cohesion, especially after Israel recently announced that it was able to disable Iranian air defenses, including the Russian S-300 system, which requires Iran to send a clear message reaffirming that its military power is still cohesive.

Regarding the American position, Sarfandi stated that the United States sending bombers to the region and deploying this force carries a double message: the first to Iran as a warning, and the second to Israel, clarifying its inability to protect itself without American material and moral support.

The United States is not interested in open war.

Sarfandi pointed out that the most important question is: Will the United States intervene in the war? Expressing his belief that the United States is not interested in an open war with Iran.

He said that the deployment of US forces in the region aims to create a balance, not to prepare for an open war with Iran, as Washington realizes that such a scenario could lead to a comprehensive confrontation, as Iran could target US bases in the Gulf, which threatens to cross red lines, confirming what the Deputy Chairman of the Russian National Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, said two days ago, about the possibility of a third world war.

Unusual readiness for a confrontation that may be comprehensive

Ismail Al-Muslimani, an expert on Israeli affairs, spoke about the escalating tensions in the Middle East following the arrival of American B-52 bombers to the region at dawn on Sunday.

Muslimani pointed out that this move comes within the clear American efforts to protect Israel, in addition to being a strict warning to Iran, describing the bombers as terrifying, as they can carry nuclear warheads and travel long distances without the need to refuel, which reflects an unusual readiness for a confrontation that may be comprehensive.

The region is clearly approaching the possibility of a regional war, especially with the Iranian threats that followed the statements of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Musalmani added. In a speech he gave to students at a university last Saturday, Khamenei stressed that Iran will respond to the recent Israeli attacks, which included bombing Iranian bases and led to the deaths of four Iranians.

Iran wants to deal a painful blow to America and Israel

Muslimani pointed out that this escalation suggests that Iran wants to deal a painful blow to America and Israel in response to what it described as ongoing attacks.

However, Tehran left the door open, stressing that it is not interested in expanding the scope of the regional war, but the expected response comes within the framework of the United Nations Charter, which grants countries the right to self-defense according to Article 51.

Muslimani touched on the clear contradiction in the Israeli strategy, as many analysts believe that Israel wants to preempt an Iranian strike, especially with the statements of the leader of the Yisrael Beiteinu party, Avigdor Lieberman, who confirmed that previous attacks on Iran did not have a sufficient impact, and that Israel may resort to launching a more decisive strike before the US elections.

Muslimani added: The current scenario is frightening, as American B-52 bombers and other aircraft are now deployed in the region, indicating that the United States and Israel are preparing for escalating reactions that could lead to a regional clash, especially in light of Israel's continued targeting of the resistance in Gaza and Lebanon.

Iran's Options and the Future of the Region

Moslemani pointed out that Iran, which had relied on a policy of "strategic patience," now sees that this patience is running out, especially after a series of assassinations and strikes targeting Iranian sites. With the arrival of B-52 bombers, first used in World War II and improved in the 1950s, the region seems very close to a major explosion.

Muslimmani believes that the current situation puts the region on the brink of a comprehensive confrontation that may change the features of the conflict and put an end to settlement attempts, in light of mutual threats between Iran and Israel that put everyone on the brink of the abyss.

Israeli attack prompts Iran to escalate

Dr. Abdullah Nehme, a political analyst and strategic researcher in international relations, explained that the increasing military escalation in the Middle East region is a direct result of the Israeli army targeting one of the fuel components in the Iranian nuclear reactor, in a move aimed at stopping the Iranian nuclear program and obstructing its ambitions for several years.

He pointed out that this Israeli attack prompted Iran to escalate, as it declared its intention to eliminate Israel from existence and "make it pay the price" decisively.

Nehme added: Israel is preparing militarily and logistically to confront an expected Iranian response, while the United States has intensified its support for Israel by sending B-52 bombers and adding two nuclear submarines to the American fleet in the Mediterranean, in addition to large shipments of weapons that have recently arrived to strengthen the Israeli army.

The conflict between Israel and Hezbollah to limit Iran's influence

In the context of regional tensions, Nehme pointed out that the conflict between Israel and the Lebanese Hezbollah is part of the broader move to limit Iran's influence in the region, noting that Hezbollah, which is Iran's strongest arm in the Middle East, represents a strategic target for Israel and the United States, which seek to isolate Iran and weaken its allies.

Dr. Nehme stated that there is an international trend that may be represented in pressuring Lebanon to force it to comply with the American and Israeli conditions.

Regarding the general situation in the region, Nehme said: The American role in the region is not limited to monitoring, but rather constitutes the most prominent factor in reorganizing the Middle East according to a new vision, starting with what is currently happening in Lebanon.

Nehme stressed that the potential escalation in Lebanon could be a gateway to more tension in the Middle East, while any development in the situation remains dependent on the nature of the Iranian response and its repercussions on the international arena.