Hamas Rockets Jolt Israelis Back to Reality

CrossFireArabia
Analyses
May 28, 2024

Its almost a reminder of the old days! The volley of missiles on Tel Aviv from Rafah, the first in four months, is sending shivers down the spines of Israelis who fear the worse is yet to come from Hamas and the Palestinian resistance.

The launch of 12 rockets on 26 May, 2023 by the Izz Al Din Al Qassam Brigade fighters and which landed on different parts of greater Tel Aviv comes at a time when the Israeli army is immersed in east Rafah and about to wage a full military camaign on the city under the pipedream slogan of eradicating Hamas.

https://twitter.com/timesofindia/status/1794732722411249937/video/1

But the timing of the firing of the rockets – a reach and distance of 140 kilometers from Rafah, the longest so far – is designed to send a strong message to the Israeli political and military establishments that the Palestinian resistance movement remains in top fighting form despite the bunk busters, dumbs bombs and missiles hurling down Gaza’s housing estates for the past eight months.

A mad number of 75,000 tons of explosives have so far been dropped on the 364-kilometer enclave. This is the equivalent of 37 atom bombs. But in spite of this, the Palestinian resistance are still strong with thousands of fighters, rockets, guns, machine guns and ammunition in their depositories across Gaza. As Hamas officials keep warning there is still more of that to be unleashed on Israel.

The fired rockets are a message that such weapons, bombs, and sniper rifles will continue to be used against the Israeli army, its soldiers, tanks and troop carriers for the forseeble future and if they insist on staying in Gaza.

The fired rockets show Hamas will continue to use them when the need be and as the battle requires. Now, the fight is against Israeli soldiers in Gaza but are fired into the Israeli depth now and then as a warning.

🚨 Breaking | Yedioth Ahronoth: Sirens sounded in all cities of central Israel and Greater Tel Aviv after an intense missile barrage fired from Gaza.

( #Resistance missiles on Tel Aviv )
✌️✌️✌️#GazaGenocide #US_UK_Are_Terrorist_States pic.twitter.com/hLzu3a0kvt
— ahmed ghazali (@ahmedghazali79) May 26, 2024

The rockets – unleashed after a tense calm – and all the way to the north of Tel Aviv, the major political, financial, economic, industrial and knowledge capital of Israel is devastating, jolting the Israelis back into sobering reality. Politicians, military officers, economic leaders and the ordinary are asking what more can be done by the way of the devastation the Israeli armed forces have carried out on Gaza since 7 October.

Videoclips on the social media show the timing when the missiles were heard in Kfar Saba, Herzliya, and Raanana, north of Tel Aviv were sirens blasted off to the panic of ordinary Israelis, quickly trying to move out of harms way whilst senseing fear and instability back into their lives.

The surprised rockets are expected to rattle the psychology of Israelis especially since they were fired 100s of meters away from Israeli troops in Rafah which means Palestinian fighters are actually amongst them incognito.

In response to Israeli attacks on Gaza, Hamas' military wing, the Kassam Brigades, struck targets in Askalan, Makan and Tel Aviv which were occupied with 130 long-range heavy missiles.#GazaUnderAttack #GazaUnderFire pic.twitter.com/irFzraZgqm
— – dini (@_dsisswsdrm_) May 12, 2021

This should of deep concern to the Israeli Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi who worries about the state of his soldiers in Gaza, having been in daily battle for the last eign months, in turrain that is alien to them and aginst fighters who know only too well the nooks and cranies of the towns, cities, alleways, and roads of Gaza and where soldiers are being killed and maimed by the day to ghost Palestinian fighters.

Indeed, although a full scale invasion is yet to materialize in Rafah, the Israeli army is already bombing different parts of the city and has been doing so for the last 18 days. So the war there has already started.

The missiles into Israel, over Tel Aviv, cities in the center and in settlements around

Gaza are an addition and pressure to the real fight inside the enclave being helped by Hezbollah missiles penetrating into Israel, the Houthis from Yemen firing most at Eilat and the occasional firing, from islamists groups from deep inside Iraq.

Finally, the rockets are a warning by Hamas to Netanyahu not invade Rafah for the cost of doing so will be greater than you think, for the city will be the final graveyard of Israel soldiers and the over 100 hostages who are still held in captivity there.

But Netanyahu may not be thinking at all about that since he wants the war to continue to lengthen his time out of prison and play into the hands of the extreme right wing while claiming to want to eradicate Hamas. What he wants are unattainble objectives explained by the bad Israeli army situation in Gaza.

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Analyses

Netanyahu, Iran and The ‘Destructive’ Israeli Personality

CrossFireArabia
June 8, 2026

By Dr Adnan Naeem

The recent escalation between Israel and Iran suggests that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is currently experiencing one of his most complex and perplexing political moments. The man who has long relied on military force as a tool to resolve conflicts and impose realities now finds himself besieged by outcomes that fall short of his stated objectives and the immense cost borne by the entire region.

In Gaza, after months of war, destruction, and continuous military operations by the Israeli army, fundamental questions remain unanswered: Where is the victory promised to the Israelis? Where are the strategic achievements that justified the continuation of the war? The Gaza battle was transformed from a project for a swift resolution into an open-ended war of attrition, with the political, security, and humanitarian costs increasing daily and rapidly.

As for the northern front (Lebanon), Netanyahu has failed to impose the equations he repeatedly wanted to create. Instead of restoring Israel’s image of deterrence, new realities have emerged confirming that the region does not respond to threats, and that the power balance has become far too complex to be determined by the rhetoric of force or displays of military capability.

At the heart of these shifts, Iran has emerged as a model distinct from the many adversaries Israel has traditionally dealt with. Tehran does not merely declare its right to retaliate; it exercises this right whenever it perceives its interests or sovereignty are threatened. The recent regional confrontations demonstrated that a policy of threats is no longer sufficient to subdue or deter adversaries while military calculations have become far more costly and complex than Netanyahu imagined.

It is to be noted while Netanyahu sometimes speaks of opportunities for negotiation or security and political arrangements, he at the same time continues to generate the conditions for escalation. How can peace be built while the circle of confrontation widens? And how can the world be convinced of the seriousness of the political process when the language of force remains the sole instrument for managing the conflict?

He appears like a cunning fox, claiming to be engaged in negotiations for peace but focusing on security matters rather than the political file. The security file establishes a limited, relative stability, not a lasting one, waiting to reignite conflict in the region, particularly on the Lebanese front.

Netanyahu works on downplaying and delaying the importance of resolving the political issue first. He thus evades political obligations and commitments under international pressure regarding Lebanese rights for instance, most importantly ( is a complete withdrawal, even from the Shebaa Farms, demarcation of borders, including maritime borders, and Lebanese rights to the gas fields off the Lebanese coast – the Karish field).

This contradiction reveals a crisis deeper than a mere disagreement over military tactics; it reflects a personal political predicament facing Netanyahu. He understands – as he approaches the general elections – that a ceasefire could open the door to domestic accountability regarding security and political failures, and could revive questions about his political future, not to mention corruption cases and crises such as his dismantling of the judicial system and the conscription of Haredim. Therefore, it seems the continuation of the tension gives him more room to maneuver than political compromises would.

Within Israel itself, and as the general elections approaches, the gap between Netanyahu and growing segments of society widens. The opposition is gaining strength, protests continue unabated and the families of fallen and wounded soldiers are raising their voices in an unprecedented manner. Meanwhile, criticism is mounting from security and military figures who believe the government lacks a clear vision to resolve the crisis.

Today, Netanyahu’s image resembles that of his missiles: Soaring into the sky, creating a deafening roar, but quickly returning to reality, where difficult questions and stubborn facts await him. Wars may postpone crises, but they do not eliminate them, and escalation may temporarily alter the landscape, but it does not create a lasting victory.

Conversely, the United States appears more inclined toward de-escalation and preventing the region from erupting into a full-blown war. Washington understands its strategic interests require containing the conflict, not expanding it. It prefers pursuing political and security arrangements that reduce the likelihood of a major confrontation. However, this approach clashes with Netanyahu’s desire to keep the region on the brink of conflagration, hoping to alter the facts on the ground or escape the demands of domestic politics.

Between heaven and earth, Netanyahu oscillates between the rhetoric of power and the reality of impotence, between his political ambitions and the limits of what military force can achieve. As for the region, it continues to pay the price for this oscillation, which has so far produced nothing but more tension and instability.

This article, written by Dr Adnan Naeem, an Israeli affairs expert, was published in the Arabic Maannews website and reprinted in crossfirearabia.com

Analyses

Iran: ‘Strategic Patience’ to ‘Sustained Confrontation’

marwan
June 7, 2026

By Najih Mohammad Ali

In a clear and direct language, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) affirmed that regional “peace and stability will not be achieved unless there is withdrawal from the occupied Lebanese territories.” This stance followed Hezbollah’s Secretary-General’s rejection of the Washington talks, emphasizing his refusal to separate the arenas and the “Dahieh for the North” equation.

This statement expresses a coherent strategic vision that considers regional stability inextricably linked to ending occupations and aggressions. It places the defense of Lebanon, Syria, and the region among Iran’s political and military priorities.

This shift to a strategy of “eternal war”—or continuous confrontation—and reflects a pragmatic and principled decision made by Tehran after decades of pressure and aggression. Iran did not abandon the idea of a settlement in vain; rather, it realized that relying on partial agreements with Washington, which imposes unilateral conditions and disregards the rights of peoples, is no longer a viable option.

The cowardly assassination of Martyr Qassem Soleimani, followed by direct strikes targeting high-ranking Iranian leaders, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, proved that relying solely on “strategic patience” is mistaken for weakness. Therefore, Iran has shifted to a doctrine of active deterrence based on the entire axis of resistance, making any aggression costly for its adversaries.

This transformation was not the result of the absolute dominance of a hardline faction, as Zionist-American narratives and their Arab proxies (and, of course, the Iranian opposition abroad) claim. Rather, it is a natural evolution of the Iranian elite that stood united in the face of external aggression.

After significant losses, the priority of maintaining national and revolutionary cohesion emerged. Defending revolutionary principles—exporting the spirit of resistance and confronting arrogance—has become an essential part of the regime’s identity that has become a source of strength to prevent internal collapse whilst uniting the people behind the leadership in the face of sanctions. Pragmatists and hardliners alike now agree that continued confrontation better protects national interests than concessions that could lead to disintegration.

The leaders of the Iranian regime believe—and I think they are right—that continuing the confrontation will yield greater strategic gains than any fragile peace agreement. History proves that America understands only the language of force and attrition. From Vietnam to Afghanistan, wars of attrition forced Washington to withdraw.

Today, the “Axis of Resistance” is cleverly applying this equation: Linking the arenas to prevent separate deals that would weaken Lebanon, Iraq, or Yemen, and imposes a heavy price on its adversaries. Iranian diplomacy has been transformed into the diplomacy of the field, as General Soleimani envisioned, and is now a flexible tool that buys time and exposes the contradictions of the other side, while maintaining full military readiness.

The American-Israeli strikes have already altered Tehran’s calculations in favor of adopting an offensive-defensive posture. Instead of settling for limited responses, Iran is developing comprehensive deterrent capabilities through its natural allies, who represent the will of the region’s peoples in the face of occupation.

This is a calculated escalation, a precise strategic calculation based on resilience and strategic depth. Within the elite, a balance prevails between caution, fearing losses, and resolve, which sees resistance as the only path to dignity and independence.

Compared to the previous “strategic patience,” the strategy of sustained confrontation has proven effective in preserving battlefield gains and preventing the regional collapse of the resistance axis. It has succeeded in exhausting the enemy and strengthening internal unity, despite economic challenges primarily attributed to unjust sanctions, not Iranian policy.

The most serious risk facing this strategy lies in the possibility of miscalculation by adversaries and their attempts to impose a full-scale war, but Iran has repeatedly demonstrated an exceptional capacity for resilience and adaptation.

We are indeed facing a “simmering cold war,” where there is no false peace imposed by force, nor a total war that destroys everyone. This situation serves Iran and its axis because it maintains the strategic balance, prevents surrender, and opens the door to a comprehensive and just settlement based on withdrawal from occupied territories and respect for the sovereignty of states.

In conclusion, this “perpetual war” relies on the long-term vision of the Iranian character. It is not a whim, but an existential choice imposed by the ongoing aggression against Iran and the peoples of the region.

Iran is defending itself and the dignity of the nation, and affirms that true stability begins with ending aggression, occupation, and foreign interference. This path, despite its difficulties, reinforces Tehran’s position as an indispensable regional power and paves the way for a new balance of power that respects the rights of peoples. The region needs such firm stances to achieve an honorable peace, not surrender.

The author is a researcher in Iranian and regional affairs and this article is reproduced from the Arabic Al Rai Al Youm website and reprinted in crossfirearabia.com.