’Israeli’ Outlets Raise Alarm: Has ‘Israel’ Submitted to Iran’s Equation?

By Staff, Agencies

"Israeli" analysts on Channel 12 posed a critical question amid the ongoing regional war: “Has 'Israel' once again yielded to Iran’s equation?”

Framing the debate around what they called the “Dahiya Test,” the analysts pointed to unresolved questions surrounding the wars on Iran and Lebanon, including how "Israel" will respond to the "red line" in Beirut.

"Channel 12" war affairs analyst Nir Dvori argued that the prevailing uncertainty is a direct consequence of US President Donald Trump’s efforts to constrain "Israeli" attacks amid the prospect of a ceasefire arrangement between Washington and Tehran.

According to Dvori, Iran has drawn a clear red line around Beirut, explicitly signaling that it would not tolerate any attack on the Lebanese capital.

He contended that Trump’s pressure campaign succeeded in halting aggression against Iran on Monday, while simultaneously casting "Israeli" attacks on Lebanon into a state of strategic ambiguity.

Even if the US president ultimately fails to secure an agreement with Tehran, Dvori noted, he has demonstrated a willingness to exert considerable pressure on the "Israeli" military and impose operational constraints

Against this backdrop, Dvori posed a central strategic question: whether the uncertainty surrounding Beirut could effectively reinsert Iran into the equation. In his view, the underlying disputes remain unresolved, leaving the door open to renewed rounds of confrontation.

Dvori further pointed to "Israel’s" ongoing attempt to decouple the Lebanese and Iranian arenas, while acknowledging the substantial obstacles facing such a strategy.

He argued that the current situation leaves two parallel tracks in play: one aimed at pressuring Hezbollah and the Lebanese government into reaching an agreement, and another focused on securing an understanding with Iran itself, a process that remains largely contingent on Trump’s diplomatic efforts.

For his part, Channel 12’s Palestinian and Arab affairs analyst Ohad Hemo said that Iran’s conditions for halting attacks on Monday extended beyond its own territory to include southern Lebanon, raising a key question: “Will Iran keep its word?”

Hemo argued that Tehran has thus far acted in accordance with its commitments, making it difficult to conclude that the current escalation has run its course, particularly as "Israeli" attacks on southern Lebanon continue.

The developments, he suggested, indicate that the situation remains fluid and vulnerable to further deterioration.

He further acknowledged that Iran appears to be entrenching a new strategic doctrine, one in which "Israel" can no longer target Lebanon while expecting Tehran to remain a passive observer.

“So far, this is exactly the reality we are seeing on the ground,” Hemo said, pointing to a growing linkage between the Iranian and Lebanese fronts.

Against that backdrop, Hemo cautioned against prematurely declaring the confrontation over. With critical questions still unresolved and uncertainty mounting in recent hours, he argued that the region may yet face further developments before any durable conclusion can be reached.

Against the backdrop of the equations imposed by Iran and the latest escalation on Monday, "Channel 12" diplomatic affairs analyst Dana Weiss conceded that the situation would likely have been “better” had "Israel" ended its aggression in June 2025, arguing that it has since become mired in successive rounds of confrontation with Iran.

Turning to Lebanon, Weiss acknowledged that "Israel" embarked on its war in March 2026 without clearly defined strategic objectives, exposing a fundamental gap between military action and political end goals.

That reality, she argued, raises a critical question at the heart of the current campaign: “Does the current military operation have the ability to dismantle Hezbollah, yes or no?”