The Wall Street Journal reported an important detail saying that Israeli intelligence officials had begun making direct contact with individual Iranian commanders, threatening them and their families by name if they did not stand aside in the event of an uprising against the regime.
This appears to be one of the most revealing points in the report. It shows that while Israel is killing commanders and destroying their headquarters, it is also trying to hit the layer that could be relied upon to suppress any internal movement at a moment of broad political or security instability.
Detail
What stands out in this theme is that the threat, according to the newspaper, was personal and direct, delivered through contacts based on detailed knowledge of names and families. This kind of message means the battle has moved beyond targeting facilities into an attempt to shake confidence, loyalty, and psychological resilience within the apparatus itself.
More importantly, the message, as reflected by the paper, was not necessarily a call for open defection or public cooperation. It was something simpler, yet more dangerous at the same time: stand aside if the street erupts. This is where the central idea of the article becomes clear. Israel appears to be betting that weakening the instruments of repression does not happen only by killing or dispersing them, but also by planting hesitation inside them before the critical moment of choice.
In that sense, the bombing campaign and the direct contacts serve one purpose. Airstrikes pursue headquarters, muster points, and checkpoints, while individual threats target the will of those whose loyalty to this system still remains. The apparent aim is to wear down the regime in the field, while also pushing some of its members to think that defending it may become costlier than stepping back from it.
This information also suggests that Israel sees a potential uprising not as a popular event separate from the war, but as a stage whose conditions may be gradually created by exhausting the forces that are meant to prevent it. If units of the police, the Basij, or local commanders begin to feel exposed, hunted, and unable to protect their families, then the grip holding the street may begin to loosen even before it fully breaks.
What’s next?
If these details truly reflect a core part of the campaign, as presented by The Wall Street Journal, then the war, with all the destruction it has brought, is also becoming an attempt to reshape the behaviour of the regime’s men at the very moment it may need them most.
