Israeli General Warns of Long War of Attrition with Iran, Admits Initial Planning Failure

General Uri Halperin, who spent more than three decades in the corridors of the Israeli security establishment, confirmed that the military confrontation between Tel Aviv and Washington against Iran has entered a critical phase, having exceeded its fourth week. Halperin explained that this war fundamentally differs from previous combat rounds the Israeli army was accustomed to, characterized by increasing field and political complexity.

Halperin, who previously served as the military attaché to NATO, indicated that military operations were launched based on intelligence assessments and planning that were not up to the required standard. He considered that underestimating Iran's capabilities and methods of operation led to the necessity for military planners in Washington and Tel Aviv to review the basic war objectives and their feasibility on the ground.

The Israeli general stressed that Iran has proven its seriousness in seeking to acquire nuclear weapons by raising uranium enrichment levels to 60%. He believed that this shift was not merely a threat of a race towards the bomb, but an actual intention to arm itself with it, placing the region before a new and highly dangerous security reality if the regime there acquires these capabilities.

In his reading of the internal Iranian scene, Halperin mentioned that the Revolutionary Guard's control over decision-making centers pushes towards an open war of attrition with no time limits. He added that this trend reflects the magnitude of the existential threat posed by the regime if coupled with nuclear capability, making planning to confront it require clear objectives that go beyond mere fleeting airstrikes.

Halperin warned of Tehran's ability to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz, emphasizing that this scenario should not surprise military circles in the Pentagon or Tel Aviv. He explained that Iran possesses the most advanced coastal missile systems in the world, positioned in rugged geographical areas that make it difficult to neutralize them completely through aerial bombardment alone.

The former general suggested that controlling shipping lanes and depriving Iran of its economic influence might require extensive ground operations to control areas dominating the Gulf. He considered that the focus on ground forces at this stage reflects how far the course of battles has deviated from the original plans laid out before the outbreak of the confrontation.

According to the analysis published by Halperin, targeting energy facilities in countries neighboring Iran is a reasonable scenario in Tehran's calculations and not an extreme step. He affirmed that planners should have taken into account the necessity of stocking huge quantities of interceptor missiles to counter a long-term war of attrition that the entire region might be drawn into.

Halperin explained that the comprehensive Iranian strategy relies on the principle of asymmetric warfare, which does not necessarily aim to militarily defeat the opponent as much as it aims to prevent them from achieving victory. Through this approach, Tehran seeks to make the conflict costly and unpredictable, ensuring the regime's survival and its freedom in strategic maneuvering away from international pressures.

The general touched upon the role of the previous US administration, indicating that Trump's moves, encouraged by Netanyahu, ostensibly aimed to address the nuclear file. However, Halperin believes that the hidden objectives were to attempt to change the Iranian regime and seize energy reserves to control global oil prices and their flows towards China.

Halperin considered that the gap between declared and hidden objectives is often the main reason behind the failure of major military campaigns, citing the US experiences in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. He stressed that attempting to achieve multiple and disparate objectives simultaneously disperses resources and prevents reaching decisive results in confronting the adversary.

Regarding future scenarios, Halperin predicted that US Marine forces would resort to targeted landing operations to control strategic islands such as 'Kharg' Island. This move aims to cripple the Iranian regime's ability to exert economic pressure on the West, which might force Tehran to seek a ceasefire agreement.

The general believes that Washington and Tel Aviv's success in crippling the leadership in Tehran's ability to drag the region into a war of attrition is key to ending the campaign in a reasonable time. He added that weakening the influence of the Revolutionary Guard, as the main driver of the decision-making process, might open the door for internal changes led by the Iranian people as a result of deteriorating conditions.

Halperin concluded that the field reality compels military and political leadership to acknowledge the gap between aspirations and the results achieved so far. He stressed that continuing the war without a clear strategy to deal with Iranian missile and ground capabilities will lead to a long-term attrition that ultimately serves Tehran's interests.

In conclusion, Halperin affirmed that the current confrontation is one of the most important wars in recent decades due to its repercussions on global power balances. He stressed that the lessons learned from the first four weeks necessitate a shift towards militarily achievable goals instead of drifting behind political dreams that may not resonate on the battlefronts.

The current war with Iran and Hezbollah is not a short round as we are accustomed to, but a conflict of a different kind that began with insufficient planning and a clear underestimation of the opponent's capabilities.