Advertisement

Supported by

“It’s the worst story I’ve ever covered.”

Hosted by Ross Douthat, Carlos Lozada and Lydia Polgreen

The columnist Thomas L. Friedman joined the hosts of “Matter of Opinion” this week to unpack Israel’s and Iran’s latest attacks, what they mean for Gaza and the implications for the region writ large.

Below is a lightly edited transcript of this episode. To listen to this episode, click the play button below.

Lydia Polgreen: From New York Times Opinion, I’m Lydia Polgreen.

Ross Douthat: I’m Ross Douthat.

Carlos Lozada: I’m Carlos Lozada.

Lydia: And this is “Matter of Opinion.”

Over the past few weeks, Israel and Iran have engaged in a military standoff. Israel struck the Iranian Embassy in Syria, killing several top Iranian military officials. Then last weekend Iran sent hundreds of drones and missiles toward Israel. And finally, early on Friday, Israel retaliated, striking a military base in Iran.

Michelle Cottle is out this week, so to try to unpack what all this means, we asked our colleague Thomas L. Friedman to join us. He has decades of experience covering the region and has been closely following the tit for tat.

This conversation was recorded before the latest attack, so keep that in mind. But we think it provides some very helpful context to what led us to this moment and what could happen next.

Welcome back to “Matter of Opinion,” Tom.

Thomas L. Friedman: Thank you, Lydia. It’s great to be back.

Lydia: So let’s get right into it. How did Iran’s attack on Israel come to be?

Tom: Well, roughly a week before Iran launched its missile attack, Israel killed several very, very senior [Islamic] Revolutionary Guards commanders who were in an adjunct building to the Iranian Embassy in Damascus, meeting with operatives at the same time. And this gentleman was reportedly responsible for really running all the sort of Iranian operations in Lebanon, in Syria.

And so, from the Israeli point of view, he was a very high-value target. I was surprised they did this. It’s not something I thought was very wise. My grandmother used to say, just one war at a time, please. And this really was a provocation, even for the ongoing shadow war between Israel and Iran, which has been ongoing now for years.

This was definitely a step-up. And the Iranians honored the Israelis’ step-up by taking a massive step-up of their own on Saturday by launching some 300 drones, missiles and cruise missiles at Israel from Iran, marking the first time that any Middle East state has attacked Israel since Saddam Hussein did it with Scuds 33 years ago.

And in the context of the Israeli-Iranian conflict, again, tit-for-tat, shadow war, neither has ever done such a thing. I didn’t buy and don’t buy the notion that they were counting on Israel’s air defense system to shoot down basically all 300 with help from allies. That was actually quite a remarkable military feat.

Had one of them gotten through and hit an Israeli school or a government building, this audio program would be about full-scale war in the Middle East right now.

Ross: So your view is that that possibility was built into the Iranian attack? Because both during the attack, honestly, and then immediately afterward, there was this running debate about the extent to which Iran had deliberately telegraphed this move, telegraphed it to Israel, telegraphed it to the other Arab states that cooperated in shooting down the missiles, which to some people seemed to imply that Iran wanted the attack to fail.

But you don’t think that was the case, and you think, therefore, Iran was prepared for really dramatic escalation in response from Israel?

Tom: Yeah, Ross. You know, I say two things. One is, just given the physics of it, no one could count on firing 300 missiles and drones at another country, that basically none would get through. That almost all 300 would be intercepted by a, in effect, multinational force. And No. 2, when it comes to Iran, I always prefer to put an s on the end: Irans.

So maybe the supreme leader had one thing in mind and the [Islamic] Revolutionary Guards had another thing in mind. It’s a notoriously factionalized system, particularly between the Revolutionary Guards, the army and the government. And not everyone is always aligned.

Carlos: Tom, so how much or how little can we discern about Iran’s offensive capabilities and Israel’s defensive capabilities from what we just saw?

Tom: I was trying to imagine when the head of the Iranian Air Force reported back to the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, did he breathe a sigh of relief or did he say, “Zero out of 300?”

Lydia: Hmm.

Tom: “If that’s how bad our offense is, what does that mean for our defense?” Remember, Iran’s air force does not have F-35s. It does not have F-15s. So they have none of the advanced technologies that Israel and its allies have.

And so I think the Iranians are much more worried right now than not. It has been a risk-averse leadership. This is not people who have gone out of their way to bet the farm. And that’s why I was really surprised that in some ways they did, because if just one out of 300 gets through and causes a mass casualty event in Israel, I think Israel — they would have taken the plans out for Iran’s nuclear program. And we’d be in Day 5 of that war right now. So I don’t think the world fully appreciates how close we came. That’s just my gut feeling.

Lydia: What’s going on in Israel? What are the calculations that are happening right now in terms of how to respond? There was in the immediate moment this idea that they must hit back and hit back hard. Now some time has passed. Life seems to be returning roughly to normal in Israel. Where do things stand?

Tom: I think we’re all trying to divine that, Lydia. So several factors are sort of converging here. One is Israel is having the best week of this war since Oct. 7, in terms of global public opinion. People now see at the interstate level what they’re up against, and it’s not inconsiderable. And that’s why you’ve had visits by the German foreign minister, the British, people really expressing solidarity. But within the Israeli government, one of the things that’s troubled me since the war began is that there’s basically no opposition in Israel. Since the beginning of the war, there’s been no opposition.

It’s not like Gantz and Eisenkot who have joined the government from the leading opposition party, I mean they’re — I don’t know — 10 degrees different from Netanyahu, but it’s not like there’s a liberal party arguing something completely different at all. It’s much more nuanced. In other words, Israeli politics still revolves around Bibi Netanyahu, and he’s in everybody’s........

© The New York Times