TEHRAN - In an analysis, Sobh-e-No discussed the Saturday military operation of the Zionist regime against Iran and wrote: This attack was more of a media show than an effective military attack.

Long before this operation, the Israeli regime had launched extensive propaganda campaign and with repeated threats. It was trying to show the face of its military power as a serious threat to Iran. However, the attack, with small explosions, put an end to the Israeli regime's grand claims. This attack proved that the operation was not only a failure but also lacked military impact. In addition, the failure of the Israeli regime in this operation was due to its lack of courage to carry out a larger attack. The Zionist regime is well aware that Iran can directly fire missiles at strategic targets in the occupied territories. These responses have already attracted the world's attention to Iran's power and showed that Iran does not hesitate to defend itself and that it severely punishes aggressors.

Etemad: The response must create deterrence

Etemad wrote about the Israeli regime’s attack on Iran's military centers. It said: When we examine the enemy operations, it is not important to pay attention to whether the aggression was limited or unlimited; what is important is that the country's military forces must upgrade their technology both in terms of defensive and offensive operations. The Israelis are attacking with the support of the American ammunition depot, but in Iran, we have provided this ammunition by relying on ourselves, so we must keep this important point in mind. The important point is that relying on the policy of ambiguity will be more effective in this field. This policy maybe costly, but it causes more harm to enemies. It is not necessary to declare exactly whether we intend to take countermeasures or not. The type of our performance is important, not the way we declare it. Our response should be in such a way as to create deterrence, and this deterrence will not be created only through missiles.

Farhikhtegan: We will neither hesitate nor act hastily

In an interview with Reza Sadr al Hosseini, an expert on West Asia issues, Farhikhtegan discussed the type of Iran's military response to the Zionist regime. He said: Since Iran's response to the Zionist regime under Operation True Promise II the conditions and developments in the region have taken a different form, and speculations had been raised about the time and manner of Israel's attack on Iran. Finally, this happened and the Israeli army organized an attack against our country. The Zionist regime took an adventurous action to undermine peace in the region. The effects of the success of the two operations of the True Promise were to an extent that the Zionist regime had to take an action to respond to the settlers’ public opinion and its international supporters. They intended to compensate for the lost dignity of Netanyahu and the military commanders of the Zionist regime. It is quite clear for the Islamic Republic of Iran that this adventure was carried out with the help of America and some European troika states. The Islamic Republic has the right to respond both internationally and militarily. The statement of the Leader of the Revolution that the Islamic Republic will neither hesitate nor act hastily in this matter is one of the issues that will be on the agenda of the responsible authorities in this regard.

Donya-e-Eqtesad: Diplomacy with small but pragmatic goals

The continuation of Israel's war in Gaza, which has spread to the back- and-forth attacks between Iran and Israel, has pushed the Middle East to a boiling crisis. This situation can involve other actors in the region. Now, Iran should use its diplomatic capacity to reach a ceasefire. The level of attack by the Zionist regime showed that they were not willing to increase the conflict with the Islamic Republic of Iran. In the current situation, the status is in favor of Tehran, and this opportunity should be turned into a strategic achievement, the first achievement of which could be a ceasefire in the battlefronts of Lebanon and Gaza. The Arab countries of the region condemned this attack and completely avoided cooperation with the regime. This issue showed the success of diplomacy after Operation True Promise II. It showed that diplomacy can serve national interests. If Iran can tactically and pragmatically reach two small but realistic goals by continuing open and secret negotiations, it will be an important step in advancing regional politics. Firstly, the powerful countries of the region should be prevented from cooperating with the regime, and secondly, the countries of the region should join the ceasefire campaign.