TESTING THE LIMITS OF STRATEGIC PATIENCE?

Israel and Iran traded shots over the weekend.  The anaconda's coils continue to tighten, and Our President doesn't seem troubled.  “I am going to call Bibi right now and tell him not to retaliate. Each of them had their fun. Israel had its strike, and Iran had its strike. We don’t need another one.”  As of this afternoon just a little bit south of Wisconsin, the fireworks appear to be over.

But what does one make of the ongoing standoff?  The duly constituted government of Lebanon would like to establish the monopoly on violence that a proper government has, and is negotiating with the duly constituted government of Israel to do so.  "Lebanon Does Not Belong to Iran, Iran Is the Problem."  It might be to the Lebanese government seeking to crack down on the religious gangbangers playing at shadow government that Iran seeks to direct its ire.  Predictably, the Obama holdovers of the Quincy Institute see the mullahs feeling their oats and exercising more leverage as a consequence of Trumpian dithering.

Israeli commentators have been explicit that Israel could not allow Iran to establish a new regional equation—one in which Tehran successfully extended deterrence over Lebanon.

But by defying Trump, Israel has done more than challenge Iran’s new equation; it has also undermined Trump’s credibility.

If Israel’s defiance carries no consequences, it will reinforce the view in Iran that Trump either cannot or will not restrain Israel. From Tehran’s perspective, a deal with Washington has little value if the United States is unable—or unwilling—to curb Israeli actions. An unconstrained Israel would only increase the likelihood of renewed conflict and continued efforts to draw the United States back into war.

To repeat, as of this afternoon, both the mullahs and the Israelis are exchanging insults and Our President continues to wish for a deal, the absence of a manager to make such a deal with notwithstanding.

Taking on Israel is no easy task in Washington. From Trump’s perspective, it is only worth doing if an agreement with Iran is already secured. In short, Trump is willing to restrain Israel to preserve a deal, but not to obtain one.

Iran, however, wants evidence that Trump can restrain Israel before agreeing to a deal.

As a result, the most likely scenario is another round of Iranian and Israeli strikes, with Trump declining to meaningfully constrain Israel.

The key question is whether Trump will eventually enter the conflict—or be pulled into it.

The Iranians appear prepared for either outcome. If Trump re-enters the war, Tehran may employ options it withheld during the previous conflict, including disrupting Red Sea shipping and targeting GCC oil infrastructure in an effort to drive oil prices well above $200 per barrel.

If Trump stays out, such horizontal escalation may be deemed unnecessary. Instead, Tehran will seek to exhaust Israel’s air defenses and further deplete its stockpile of interceptors.

Our President continues to carry on about an agreement, to the frustration of Iran hawks Stateside, but with Iran and Israel holding fire after they "had their fun" who knows what is going on?

David Blair, with London's Telegraph, suggests now might not be the time for Iran's militants to get too full of themselves.  "Iran’s confidence may soon turn to folly in Trump’s fiasco of a war."  That covers all the bases, doesn't it?

Iran's overweening confidence could yet turn into folly. Its leaders are a hair's breadth from making themselves once again the targets of a furious joint onslaught by Israel and America. Having been through this once before – and survived over 13,000 air strikes – they clearly believe they can do the same again.

No one can tell whether that judgement is correct. But there are two certainties. The world economy cannot withstand the loss of the oil, gas and fertiliser that should be passing through the Strait of Hormuz for much longer. And if and when Mr Trump succeeds in extricating himself from his fiasco of a war and averting a global economic calamity, he will have to strike a deal with Iran that falls far short of his grandiose demands for the "surrender" of the regime.

Predictably, Jake Johnson with the jihadi-friendly Common Dreams joins the chorus. "‘The Humiliation Just Compounds’: Trump Tells Netanyahu Not to Bomb Iran, Then Israel Strikes Anyway."

That strike might have accounted for whatever remains of the nepo baby ayatollah as well as revolutionary guards commander Ahmad "The Klingon" Vahidi.  We don't credit any war story immediately.

For the moment, the "complete collapse" of the ceasefire that the Institute for the Study of War feared in its Sunday report has not materialized.  More to come, I'm sure.