Has Israel Bitten Off More Than It Can Chew?

Mathrubhumi English - June 17, 2025

Israel, that ivory tower of martial confidence, now finds itself precariously perched on a crumbling edifice. What seemingly began as a determined mission to neutralise Hamas has metastasised into an incipient regional conflagration. And on surveying the apparent wreckage of policy, doctrine, and international credibility, one cannot help but ask: has Israel indeed overreached?

Israel currently finds itself entrenched on at least four fronts: Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and now Iran. Its Iron Dome-led collage of defences is visibly straining under not just rockets but full-blown missile barrages. Iran’s audacious spring strikes of over 200 drones and missiles represent a doctrinal shift in proxy warfare, forcing Israel to confront nation-state aggression directly.

As retired IDF Major-General Giora Eiland had warned months ago, engaging Hezbollah across multiple fronts was a mistake.  He had said, Israel “would not be able to defeat Hezbollah”,  That warning went unheeded, and, now, Israel’s embattled north faces daily bombardments, while its Gaza campaign drags on almost interminably.  Add to this, Israel’s bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities has escalated tensions to a dangerously elevated plateau.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s provocations in Iran, like raids on Natanz and drone murders of officials, have, in reality, shattered Israel’s self-imposed limits. Operation "Rising Lion," which was heralded as a tactical success, has seen Israel strike Iran deeply for the first time in decades.  Netanyahu, in a video released by his administration, appealed to Iranians to “rise up against theocratic rule,” claiming that Israel was “clearing the path” for them. Many experts caution that this may signal a dangerous overreach.  In the New Yorker article, analysts note that Israel’s scope extends beyond nipping Iran’s nuclear aspirations, and that it flirts with regime change, a perilous and naïve ambition as many experts believe. In his column on foreign affairs in The Washington Post, David Ignatius warned, “A campaign of bombing of the kind Tehran is experiencing makes people hunker down, turn inward and often fight harder. Strategic bombing didn’t break the will of the British, German or Japanese people during World War II. It hasn’t yet destroyed Hamas in Gaza, either, for that matter.”  The simpler regime-change strategy would risk triggering a more fanatical IRGC regime or, even worse, a nuclear surge – quite a textbook case of "opium of unintended consequences!"

As its ambition collides with reality, we find that Israel’s traditional allies are uneasy. In Europe and the Global South, sovereignty and proportionality counts do matter. The Guardian warns that Israel’s reputation (which it has managed to tarnish with its continued violent persecution of Palestinians in Gaza) may be irreparably damaged.  Meanwhile, US senior leadership is splitting; President Trump warned of a broader war, urging evacuation in Tehran.  Top Pentagon officials are split over the scope and scale of U.S. military support for Israel.  G7 leaders have called for de-escalation even as they reiterated Israel’s right to defend itself.

As she ends her column in The Guardian, Nesrine Malik says that Israel’s campaigns (both propaganda and on the ground) regard “the Middle East as a theatre for domestic politics, reputation management and experimentation in bringing about “safety” on yet-to-be-defined terms. But the region is not just Israel’s backyard. It is other people’s homes and they have their own politics, histories, populations, and security needs that, increasingly, are subject to a country that has decided that only its own agenda matters.“  In response, Gulf mediators are growing wary, their patience fraying by the day. Russia and China seem poised to exploit Western disarray, recalibrating the global strategic order.

One cannot deny Israel’s military prowess: F‑35s, sophisticated missiles, and an AI-enhanced targeting pipeline. But have they opened too many fronts with this offensive? That is the question. Iran is a master of proxy warfare.  Israel could be fighting not just against Iran, but also the Hezbollah from Lebanon, the Houthis from Yemen, and Hamas from Gaza, all at once.  Atlantic Council’s Jonathan Panikoff warns that once you attack national infrastructure or leaders, you risk compelling Hezbollah and Iran to respond, raising the stakes into a regional war (atlanticcouncil.org). While the Hezbollah has restrained itself thus far, you cannot expect exhaustion in Iran and Lebanon to last forever .

Israel’s strategy teeters on a knife’s edge. Missile waves from Iran could overwhelm Israel’s missile defenses, including Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow systems under strain.  Again, should Iranian proxies be drawn back into coordinated strikes, Israel faces the risk of grinding warfare on the North.  With growing global condemnation and an increasingly iffy U.S. support, Israel's manoeuvrability has taken a hit.  And the political and ethical divides, and civil unrest in the West Bank and among Israeli Arab citizens, not only add fuel, but threaten unity within Israel.

While Israel has played the proud and defiant angle, it now risks imperial overreach, and, it would seem,  its best hope lies in recalibrating momentum, dialling back aggression toward Iran, and avoiding fissures with America and returning focus to Gaza and Lebanon.

If Netanyahu continues to chase grand designs, regime change and regional dominance, the result may not be Iron Dome victories, but a terrible region-wide quagmire. He is left with a very simple choice: defend the house within sight, or chase mirages that may end up burning it down.  Let’s hope that he de-escalates, regains focus, and defines a realistic horizon… before what was bite becomes choke!

(The author is an independent political analyst and can be reached at hari@healthcombine.com)