What was "Israel's" objective behind its attack against the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps at the T4 airport? Why was it at that particular time? What was the relationship between this attack and the strategic objective announced by Tel Aviv: "to hinder Iran's localization in Syria"? In other words, how does it want to achieve this objective through this attack?
Before talking about the main objective of the attack by the "Israeli" Air Force against the Revolutionary Guard Corps in Syria, it should be made clear that the enemy's leaders are trying to add the title of preemption to their act of aggression. That is, there is an imminent threat against the so-called "‘Israeli' national security", which forced the decision-makers to resort to this option. The aim of this description is to gain internal legitimacy for this approach, as it is fraught with danger and the possibility of rolling towards a broad military confrontation. Therefore, the "Israeli" leadership prefers to tell the public that it had no alternative option but to move to a direct targeting despite the dangers. Thus, it becomes unaccountable to the potential price.
In this context, the "Israeli" entity adopts the approach of threatening that exceeds the intentions and readiness of the others to attack it. It even includes preventing others from having the ability to defend themselves. Thus, developing their defensive and deterrent capabilities becomes a threat to the entity that forces it to act.
Based on this, "Israel" launches its threats to prevent the rebuilding of the Syrian army's military capabilities as well as to develop its missile and military capabilities. It has repeatedly declared that it will prevent, by all means, the building-up of capabilities in Syria, which are similar to that of Hezbollah in Lebanon in order to avoid strangling "Israel", as explained by "Israeli" War Minister Avigdor Lieberman; or to prevent the construction of a northern arc as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu exclaimed. "Israel" sums up its objective in the Syrian arena through its pursuit of hindering the Iranian presence in Syria, which means preventing the formation and construction of a deterrent resistance in the Syrian arena.
In light of the above, the "Israeli" entity did not hide the fact that the purpose of its attacks, specifically the recent attack that resulted in the martyrdom of several members of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, is part of its strategy to target the Iranian presence in Syria. The chief of staff of the "Israeli" army Gadi Eizenkot previously expressed this during interviews he made on the eve of Passover. "The desired final status is the withdrawal of all Iranian-Shiite forces from Syria, including Hezbollah and the militias," he stated. He also explained that "Israel" will not provide any means that will lead to the removal of the parties of the axis of resistance from the Syrian arena.
As for the timing of this attack, it is linked to a series of paths and developments, starting from the exhaustion of "Israeli" political gambits through Washington and Moscow as well as the messages of intimidation it has directed on multiple occasions. But when Tel Aviv discovered that these bets have failed, the political and security decision makers in Tel Aviv found themselves at a critical juncture, forcing them to either retreat or venture further. Thus, the security and political institutions chose the latter.
As for the relationship between the attack and the stated strategic objective of "preventing Iran's localization in Syria", the security and political establishment claimed that the attack was a military strike and a message to the Revolutionary Guard Corps stating that they should leave Syria. Otherwise, they would be subject to the following attacks. Since Tehran's natural position is that it will not retreat in the face of the "Israeli" enemy, this means that we may be entering a stage of tension that could develop towards a confrontation on the Syrian arena aimed at establishing rules and equations governing the movement of the conflict.
As a result, voices in Tel Aviv were raised after the conclusion that Iran would respond to the attack. This prompted them to direct a series of successive threats against the Syrian government and the overall Iranian presence. These threats reflect that the estimates of the "Israeli" security establishment have realized that the Iranian response is in any case coming. But the question remains: when, how, where and how great is it?