Israel faces a difficult choice.

The Israeli military announced yesterday (April 17) that it had carried out a series of airstrikes targeting more than 40 targets in the Gaza Strip within 24 hours, according to The Times of Israel . Simultaneously, Israeli aircraft also attacked and killed two Hezbollah commanders in southern Lebanon. These actions occurred as the Israeli military was preparing to retaliate against Iran and deploy ground troops to the Rafah area in southern Gaza to eliminate Hamas forces.

Risks for Israel

Despite calls for restraint from Western allies, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains determined to implement his plan on both fronts, although he has not yet announced a specific timeframe. AFP yesterday quoted regional experts as saying that the Israeli military cannot conduct two such operations simultaneously. John Erath, Director of Policy at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation (USA), suggested that Israeli leaders might consider options that do not escalate tensions with Iran and offer a way out of the crisis.

Points of conflict: Israel strikes against Iran; Ukrainian president angered by US actions.

If Israel remains determined to retaliate against Iran, such action would increase concerns about a multi-front war and would likely further isolate Tel Aviv. While the Israeli military possesses significant advantages over its regional rivals, attacking Iran would require permission from Gulf states to use their airspace, a guarantee that is not guaranteed. Furthermore, a direct conflict would increase pressure on the Israeli military, distracting them from the conflict in Gaza and impacting the economy .

Israeli tanks operating near Gaza on April 16.

Speaking to The Guardian on April 16, Iran's chargé d'affaires to the UK, Seyed Mehdi Hosseini Matin, accused Israel of seeking to draw the West into a full-scale war in the Middle East with immeasurable consequences. He asserted that Tehran had achieved its goals in the attack on Israel and warned of an immediate and forceful response if Tel Aviv made the mistake of retaliating.

The West offered appeasement.

Yesterday, the United States and the European Union (EU) suggested increasing sanctions against Iran over the attack on Israel on the morning of April 14th. White House officials said the US would impose new sanctions targeting Iran's missile program, drones, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Ministry of Defense , and its oil export capabilities. EU High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell said the alliance is working to take stronger measures against Iran's supply of weapons to other forces.

In a phone call on April 16, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak also sought to appease his Israeli counterpart to avoid escalating tensions. During the call, Sunak stated that escalation would only increase insecurity in the Middle East and emphasized that this was a time for "calm heads." British Foreign Secretary David Cameron and German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock met with Israeli President Isaac Herzog in Jerusalem yesterday. Following the meeting, Cameron said that Israel had clearly decided to respond, but he hoped Tel Aviv would act in a way that would "least escalate the situation as much as possible."

What did Iran gain from the attack on Israel?

The Security Council votes on Palestine's UN membership.

AFP reported yesterday that the UN Security Council will vote on Palestine's full membership in the UN on April 18. The UN General Assembly can admit a new member with a two-thirds majority vote, but this only happens after the Security Council unanimously agrees to nominate a member.

In a statement on April 16, the Arab Group affirmed its firm support for the Palestinian effort, emphasizing that full membership at the UN is a crucial step toward a just and lasting solution to the Palestinian issue. The United States, a long-time veto of Security Council nominations, argued that the establishment of an independent Palestinian state should occur through direct negotiations between the parties rather than at the UN. According to Reuters, US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said on April 17 that a Security Council resolution proposing full membership for Palestine would not help bring about a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Source link: https://thanhnien.vn/israel-dung-truoc-lua-chon-can-nao-185240417200320262.htm