Tehran holds its fire

For weeks, Israelis have been “bracing” themselves—as headline writers like to put it—for a new wave of attacks from Iran’s rulers. Following the July 31 assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in a well-guarded government guesthouse in Tehran, the theocrats had threatened “severe” revenge.

As I write this, that dog hasn’t barked—or, more precisely, hasn’t bitten. Why not? We can only speculate. And I intend to.

First, let me remind you that Mr. Haniyeh’s demise did not happen in a vacuum (to coin a phrase).

It was one untimely death among thousands resulting from a war his terrorist organization initiated with its invasion of Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 and its barbarous pogrom.

Hamas leaders in Gaza then retreated into the subterranean fortress they had constructed with funds from the “international donor community,” leaving Gazan civilians to serve as their human shields and public relations pawns in neighborhoods above.

As for Hamas multimillionaire leaders in Qatar and Turkey, they continued dining in elegant restaurants.

One possible explanation for Tehran’s restraint over recent weeks is that the Biden administration, to its credit, has strengthened the U.S. military posture in the region.

American forces are now on hand to prevent Iranian missiles and drones from reaching their intended victims, as they did on April 13 when more than 300 were fired at Israel.

Of course, American forces could do more. They could respond to additional acts of aggression by Iran’s rulers by destroying Iranian missile and drone factories, and the ports from which these weapons are being shipped to Houthis and Russians, not to mention the facilities in which Iran’s rulers are developing nuclear weapons.

Decision-makers in Tehran probably regard such responses as unlikely. But they may be plausible enough to cause concern.

When I say decision-makers, I really mean Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. He may worry, too, that the Israelis have capabilities—kinetic, cyber, covert—that they are reluctant to use preemptively but might unleash in response to an attack.

Factor in that Mr. Khamenei knows his threats of escalation will impel the Americans to put additional pressure on Jerusalem to agree to additional concessions in the indirect, U.S.-mediated negotiations between Israel and Hamas.

Mr. Biden’s envoys recently came up with a “bridging proposal”—a compromise under which Israel would cease firing on terrorists and Hamas would release some of the hostages it is holding and torturing. Israel accepted the proposal. Hamas rejected it.

When I say Hamas, I really mean Yahya Sinwar, the architect of the Oct. 7 attacks. Following the funeral of Mr. Haniyeh, he was named the organization’s supreme leader—commander of both its “political” and “military” wings.

Why did Mr. Sinwar say no deal? Likely because his interests would be best served were Mr. Khamenei to widen the multifront and avowedly genocidal war against Israel.

Which brings us to what happened beginning around 5 am local time Sunday. In response to intelligence indicating that Hezbollah was imminently preparing to fire from Lebanon as many as 6,000 long-range missiles at Tel Aviv and other targets, 100 Israeli fighter jets struck 40 Hezbollah missile launch sites.

Since the day following the Hamas invasion, Hezbollah has fired close to 8,000 rockets, missiles and drones at Israeli communities, killing soldiers and civilians, burning towns, farms and forests, and causing more than 80,000 Israelis to abandon their homes.

In retaliation, Israel has carried out precision strikes inside Lebanon, including, on July 30, killing the group’s senior military commander, Fuad Shukr.

Mr. Shukr, you should know, has long been wanted by the U.S. for his role in the killing of 241 American servicemen in the 1983 bombing of a U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut. Our State Department posted a $5 million bounty for information on his location.

Hezbollah still has thousands of missiles left, all emplaced in southern Lebanon in flagrant violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which was intended to bring the Iranian proxy’s 2006 war with Israel to a halt.

Another all-out war between Hezbollah and Israel would undoubtedly cause significant death and damage in Israel. But it would almost certainly decimate Hezbollah and destroy what is left of Lebanon, a formerly vibrant nation that has become a failing state since Hezbollah seized power.

Mr. Khamenei understands the importance of strategic patience. He demonstrated that in 2015, when he agreed to President Barack Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) because it gave him a patient pathway into the nuclear weapons club, along with tens of billions of dollars.

That same year, Mr. Khamenei spoke of 2040 as the date by which Israel is to be exterminated.

To that end, he has been waging a war of attrition, death by a thousand cuts, most of those cuts made by Arabs whom he is only too happy to martyr in pursuit of his imperial ambitions.

Mr. Sinwar is fine with that. He has said that Gazan civilians are “necessary sacrifices.” But would it surprise you if he’d rather not be among them?

Late last week, a senior Egyptian official told an Israeli reporter that Mr. Sinwar wants a guarantee that he won’t be assassinated.

I don’t think Israeli leaders will make that promise. But I can imagine them giving Mr. Sinwar safe passage to another country, say Turkey (incongruously both a NATO member and Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood supporter), in exchange for the release of however many hostages have not yet been brutally murdered.

This may be a long shot, but nothing would be lost if Mr. Biden’s envoys were to suggest such a deal, conveying to Mr. Sinwar that it is the only way he will ever see light at the end of his tunnel.

Originally published by The Washington Times.