### Israel’s Strikes on Iran Signal Shift from Shadow War to Open Conflict

Israel's recent military strikes on Iranian territory mark a significant shift from the decades-long shadow war between the two adversaries. For the first time, Israel openly acknowledged launching "precise strikes" on military targets within Iran, breaking a precedent that has existed since the Islamic Republic's inception 40 years ago.

Historically, Israel and Iran have avoided direct confrontation, opting instead for clandestine operations and proxy battles. Israel has engaged in covert actions, such as assassinating key Iranian figures and executing cyberattacks on critical facilities. In response, Iran has mobilized its Arab proxy militias to target Israel. The shadow war has now transitioned to an overt conflict, prompting debate within Iran about its deterrence capabilities and response strategies.

Recent developments have accelerated tensions. In April, after Iran retaliated for an alleged Israeli attack on its diplomatic building in Damascus, Israel reportedly responded by striking Iran, although it did not publicly acknowledge that action. However, the latest attack saw Israel explicitly touting its achievements, with military spokesman Daniel Hagari emphasizing Israel's newfound aerial operational freedom in Iranian airspace.

Despite the attack, Iran’s state media portrayed an image of normalcy, with schools running and Tehran streets gridlocked with traffic. Hardline commentators and social media users dismissed the attack as inconsequential. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei advised a balanced response, neither exaggerating nor downplaying the strikes' significance.

The debate over Iran's appropriate response intensified, with concerns that inaction might embolden Israel to conduct further strikes. Trita Parsi, from the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, suggested that Iran risks normalizing Israeli attacks if it does not retaliate.

The Israeli strikes reportedly targeted strategic systems vital to Iran, but not its nuclear or oil facilities. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that Iran's defense systems and missile export capabilities were significantly damaged, although Iranian officials reported only minor damage, saying it was swiftly repaired. Independent verification of the extent of damage remains unavailable.

Tehran has long relied on regional proxies, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, to serve as a security buffer against Israel. However, the recent degradation of these militias, coupled with direct strikes on Iranian territory, has sparked another internal debate over the effectiveness of this strategy. Mohammad Ali Shabani of Amwaj.media noted that some voices within Iran are questioning the efficacy of the "forward defense" doctrine.

Since the US withdrawal from the nuclear agreement in 2018, Iran has ramped up its uranium enrichment, reaching levels close to weapons-grade. While Iranian officials insist they have no intention of weaponizing their nuclear program, the ongoing Israeli strikes are emboldening factions within Iran that advocate for nuclear deterrence capabilities.

Experts remain skeptical of Iran's ability to quickly develop a nuclear weapon, even if it achieves weapons-grade uranium purity. The process of building and testing a bomb could take years, providing a window for potential Israeli interventions. The possibility of Iran pursuing nuclear weapons has become more prominent in public discourse, though Israel may seek to thwart such developments through further strikes.

Parsi pointed out that military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities might ultimately drive Tehran toward building a nuclear weapon, a scenario even the more hawkish American presidents have tried to avoid, favoring diplomatic solutions over military action.