A senior US official told the Washington Post that the toned-down early morning Israeli strike Saturday on military targets in Iran was a “proportional strike,” which “was moderate enough to quiet the conflict without provoking Iran into a counterattack.”
However, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted in a speech on Sunday: “We hit hard Iran’s defence capabilities and its ability to produce missiles that are aimed at us. The attack in Iran was precise and powerful, and it achieved all its objectives.”
But within Israel itself, there is scepticism. Israel’s most popular news outlet Channel 12 called the operation insignificant and demonstrated Iran’s status as a major power in the region. Netanyahu has not released any reliable documentation to back up his claim, which he usually does.
NourNews lampooned that the Israeli psychological war against Iran has not worked. Israel hoped to stir up panic that there might be an attack on Iran’s nuclear installations but normal life continues in Iran. It appears that Israel was not either inclined to carry out an extensive attack or was incapable of conducting such an operation without greater American involvement — or both. Iran’s attack on October 1 badly exposed the weakness of the Israeli air defence system.
So, the bottom line is that Israel may have succeeded in conducting a limited predawn operation against Iran without excessively increasing the chances of an all-out war.
Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on Sunday that the “evil committed by the Zionist regime two nights ago should neither be downplayed nor exaggerated”. Khamenei added: “Of course, our officials should be the ones to assess and precisely apprehend what needs to be done and do whatever is in the best interests of this country and nation. They [the enemy] must be made to realize who the Iranian people are and what the Iranian youth are like.”
Khamenei’s remark suggests that an immediate military response is not planned. Indeed, Tehran has been playing down the Israeli strike, saying it caused limited damage.
The foreign ministry said in a statement on Saturday that given Iran’s “inherent right of legitimate defence” under UN Charter, “Tehran will utilise all material and spiritual capabilities of the Iranian nation to defend its security and vital interests, and firmly stand by its duties towards regional peace and security.”
The statement drew attention to Israeli operations in Gaza and Lebanon, but, notably, kept silent on any Iranian response to Saturday’s air strike.
Iran will no doubt weigh the unprecedented diplomatic support from the regional states. This is a moment that Tehran cherishes, as apparent in Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s words: “Since yesterday [Saturday] until now, we are regularly receiving messages from different countries, the statements they issued, the level of condemnation from different countries both in the region. It is really remarkable that it took place at this international level.”
Other statements at the military level played down the Israeli attack saying the air defences intercepted it and only successfully “some limited damage was caused in some areas, the dimensions of which are being investigated.” The public mood in Tehran is one of high expectations from the Pezeshkian government on the economic front.
Javad Zarif, former foreign minister and current strategic adviser to the government, also made no direct threat of retaliation, saying, “The west should move away from its outdated and dangerous paradigm. It must condemn Israel’s recent acts of aggression and join Iran in efforts to end the apartheid, genocide and violence in Palestine and Gaza, and in Lebanon. Recognising Iran’s confident resolve for peace is essential; this unique opportunity should not be missed.” [Emphasis added.]
The Israeli strike did not take Tehran by surprise. In a “scoop”, Axios reported that Israel sent a message to Iran on Friday ahead of its air strikes warning the latter not to respond in “an attempt to limit the ongoing exchange of attacks between Israel and Iran and prevent a wider escalation.”
The message from Tel Aviv conveyed through third parties “made it clear to the Iranians in advance what they [Israelis] are going to attack in general and what they are not going to attack.”
Apparently, the US pressured Israel to calibrate its proposed attack as a “proportionate response”. This becomes hugely important downstream, as the Biden Administration’s efforts will continue to prevent conflict between Israel and Iran escalating into a confrontation.
To be sure, Iran will press ahead on the diplomatic track. Interestingly, the Jerusalem Post newspaper highlighted that Araghchi’s hectic tours of regional capitals are “important because he is not only visiting countries that are close to Iran historically or where Iran has interests, such as Lebanon or Iraq; rather, he is doing outreach to countries that have peace with Israel and which are close to the West, such as Jordan and Egypt…
“This shows how Iran is gaining influence in Jordan and Egypt. Egypt and Iran have been on a road to reconciliation, for instance. In addition, Iran and Saudi Arabia have reconciled with China’s backing. Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince was also in Cairo this week, illustrating how a triangle of ties between Cairo and Tehran is emerging.”
Meanwhile, Tehran will closely watch the November 5 presidential and Congressional elections in the US. In the event of a Kamala Harris presidency, the resumption of nuclear negotiations is highly likely.
On the contrary, a Donald Trump presidency may presage a difficult 4-year period ahead, but here too, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proximity with Trump to calm down tensions between Washington and Tehran should be factored in.
A paradigm shift cannot be ruled out, either. Trump is a quintessential pragmatist who disregarded criticism to engage North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un in a dramatic turnaround, and is not known to be enamoured of Zionism.
Trump boasted on Wednesday of almost daily conversations with Netanyahu. “Bibi called me yesterday, called me the day before,” Trump said. Trump had already reported a telephone conversation with Netanyahu on Saturday, claiming that the latter “wants my view on things.”
Conceivably, Trump’s repeated call for Israel to swiftly defeat Hamas and wrap up the war in Gaza, stems from the apprehension that otherwise, if he wins the upcoming November 5 election, a clash with Iran may become unavoidable.
The US is a far superior military power compared to Iran. But this is a war of attrition that is being fought on multiple fronts. And there is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare. Actually, it. was Sun Tzu, the Chinese military strategist and philosopher who lived during the Eastern Zhou period (771–256 BC) who first wrote about it.
Besides, Trump abhors open-ended US military interventions. And Iranians are known to be highly nationalistic, and subjugating them is impossible. A prolonged war can entail US retrenchment from West Asia and the destruction of Israel — and may jeopardise Trump’s mesmerising MAGA movement.
Against such a tumultuous backdrop, what are Israel’s options? There seems to be no way out of the war in West Asia but the catch is, it won’t be the sort of war Israel is hoping for, let alone win.
Seymour Hersh wrote in Substack on Tuesday, “I’ve heard nothing from contacts in Beirut close to Hezbollah — whose troops are putting up a stiff fight as they did in Hezbollah’s 2006 war against Israel — that suggests anything other than a long war ahead…”
Israel is a small country. It keeps its head above the water line thanks to American money. It lacks the capacity to wage a war with Iran on its own steam. The Israeli planes reportedly flew to Iran through US-controlled air space in Syria and Iraq and refilled by Pentagon’s planes that were positioned accordingly!
The situation is turning into a ‘zugzwang’ in real life for Israel. Anything that Israel does will only make the situation worse, and it doesn’t have a choice not to make a choice, either.
Ambassador M.K.Bhadrakumar retired from the Indian Foreign Service. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.