jordan pulse -

​By Dr. Rashed Al-Shashani
​As per our promise to our enemies: We do not understand "what is past is dead."
​Iran, exhausted by Washington's strikes, and Israel before it, alongside the pressure from governments trying to disarm its affiliated militias, does not stop provoking Washington with a strike here and another there, particularly in neighboring countries. What interest drives it to do so?
​The militarization of our nature and our fighting mindset—which well understands what they are doing—says: the enemy must remain anxious; they must not feel reassured by the passage of time, which might afford them a new readiness to maneuver behind the walls of calm, on the one hand. On the other hand, time should not be given the opportunity to "shift positions and locations." What this concept means is that the enemy's ability to impose a new reality—excusing themselves by changing circumstances, times, figures, conditions, etc., to alter the magnitude and nature of your demands—must be stripped away. Meaning, the tactic of "what's past is past and now we start fresh today" is completely non-negotiable. This explains why the Iranian position has remained locked in place for decades.
​In another objective, Iran blocks the path to seizing a military opportunity for a surprise attack that conditions of calm could prepare—which would mean a military plan proceeding with stability, even if for a few hours, ending in a decisive situational moment—something that Iran (of militarization and combat, not of the beard, prayer beads, and talismans) will not permit.
​There is a mistake that Trump makes—due to his recklessness—thinking that he can thereby split the hostile camp. For example, when he praises the Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament, hinting that an "under-the-table deal" is taking place, in which the Lebanese President might be a "biased mediator," while at the same time preparing to talk to Hezbollah, he should not expect Iran to let him approach its proxies while it perceives fears of an American flank through Saudi Arabia, whether toward a deal with the Houthis or Iraqi factions, and reaching understandings independently of Iran.
​Trump also fell into the danger of the rapprochement between Aoun and Berri, after the former was disappointed by Trump's lightweight promises, which complicated the picture for him and for the Lebanese, whose President rushed behind his Prime Minister to "Erdogan's quarters," hoping he too might win a book translated into Turkish to fend off any upcoming Syrian intervention that Trump will impose.
​The Iraqi scene carries similar traits, as he courts one side of the factions while pressuring the rest, mixing Iraq's cards with Saudi Arabia and Iran following the cancellation of Al-Sudani's visit—who also made a pilgrimage to Erdogan—after Trump "intentionally" exposed his coordination with his government. Remember our statements regarding Trump playing with the nerves of allies and friends.
​In this game scene, the battlefield of war was left open to Netanyahu behind the back of Trump, who was astounded by the accumulation of frustrating surprises. Neither Netanyahu's new plans nor his information—which "belongs to commercial propaganda" more than to "military intelligence information"—helped him out of it. Therefore, faced with Trump's inability to deliver "hidden" strikes—meaning expansion here or there—Netanyahu may resort to a limited operation that might come at the expense of positions and understandings rather than land, especially in Syria and Lebanon. But more importantly, he might operate through secret bases; not like those he established in Iraq, for they were exposed, but perhaps a smart, "mobile" base inside Iran or territory controlled by Iran-backed militias. This could be executed either by unknown personnel directly affiliated with Israel who return to their hideouts immediately after carrying out their strike, or through members of these militias or agents inside the Iranian military force, executing such strikes under the name of their factions and fleeing permanently. This scenario, while remaining in the realm of possibility, finds a plausible path when examining recent strikes on neighboring countries, and even on ships in the port of Damietta.
​We will conclude our discussion by recalling an incident that occurred years ago, when one of the leaders of the Syrian Democratic Forces concluded a meeting with American military leaders at an American military base, and just a few meters on his way out, the vehicle carrying him exploded, killing him alongside his escorts.
​The question: Where was the car rigged with explosives?
​Netanyahu may not be working alone in causing sabotage. The interest in absurdity does not lie on Iran's side alone; rather, Israel and the United States share in it, though from contrasting angles and within different standards.