From time to time it is important to remember that denial is not only a river that runs through Egypt, but a river that potentially runs through every human heart and mind. Such is the case, it would appear, with the seemingly inevitable retaliatory air strike that Israel made against Iran after Iran threw more than 300 missiles and drones ineffectually at Israel a few days ago. By all accounts, and there are too many accounts for the modest response, it seems so far, Israel’s response was very limited and targeted in such a way that it appears to have sent a message to Iran that what was done was very modest but more could be done if it was necessary. The point appears to have been made. Three drones that caused no particular damage near military bases in Isfahan appears to be a very modest strike, but the fact that the strike could be made and get through Iran’s air defenses should have a salutary effect on Iran’s bellicose response.

So far, it seems, Iran’s response has been to deny that an airstrike happened at all. This seems counterintuitive given the fact that news organizations in the United States and around the world will be reporting this strike and its potential meanings for hours. I may, indeed, be reading about it tomorrow evening as part of my pastor’s usual Sabbath bulletin message, and hear one or two more commentaries on it from others who are so inclined within my circle of prophecy buffs. It would seem, at the surface, that the amount of ink (including my own) that is being spent on it is far disproportionate to the actual value (nearly nothing) of the attack when understood in purely military terms. Nothing about war, though, is purely military. There are always human elements involved, and here the human element appears to be some rather deep psychological waters.

In this light, it is telling that neither Israel nor Iran is going out of their way to admit to the air strikes. Israel is not bragging about what it has done–or what it could have done but chose not to do–and Iran, as we have noted, is implausibly denying that anything happened at all. Perhaps, though, this is for the best. If Israel bragged that it could have done something far worse but chose something mild but also symbolic, it might look weak for promising to retaliate but not really doing much at all. On the other hand, if Iran admitted that Israel indeed made an airstrike upon their country, and was able to target a vulnerable and relevant military target, even without causing any damage to it, then Iran’s government might feel honor-bound to retaliate in turn, which might escalate matters still further between the two countries. As it is, Israel made a subtle point and Iran is accepting that point, for what it is worth, and the best case scenario is that both nations understand the other and neither feel it necessary to engage in any more military strikes against the other and can return to their shadow war without the threat of escalation.

That is the best case scenario. Certainly, other, less desirable outcomes are possible. I will let other pens dwell on such misery. As for me, as concerning as the existence of an airstrike against Iran was, what was done appears, at least so far, to have been very mild and containing a huge amount of symbolic and metaphorical language that appears to have been understood on the Iranian side. As strange as it may seem, this sort of delicate and complicated communication gives hope that the people in charge of both Israel and Iran are intelligent enough to understand what the other is trying to communicate and also leaving enough room so that neither of the two nations (nor anyone else) needs to escalate matters further. The point has been made, and understood. Business can now return, we hope, to something less violent and less dangerous, at least in this front. That is, at least, still a hope that we can hold to, at the present moment. It seems dangerous, though, to depend on such subtle communication when the stakes of war are so high. What happens when one is attempting to communicate the subtlety of what could be done but was not done to someone who does not understand, does not want to understand, and feels themselves compelled to massively retaliate to every minor slight or wound? May we not be unfortunate enough to find out.