Escalation ladder: On conflict between Israel and Iran
Iran should show strategic restraint; and the world should rein in Israel
The Israeli air strikes on Iran on Saturday opened a new phase of the unfolding regional conflict between the two key players in West Asia. This is not the first time Israel has carried out an attack inside the Islamic Republic. It has targeted Iran’s nuclear programme and killed its nuclear scientists. In April, Israel attacked an air defence system in Isfahan in retaliation against a direct Iranian missile and drone attack. In July, Ismail Haniyeh, the political chief of Hamas, was killed in Tehran. But Israel has never laid claim to any of these attacks. This time, however, Israel announced the strike while its fighters were in Iran’s air space. The targets were Iran’s air defence and missile and drone manufacturing, and storage facilities in at least three provinces, including Tehran, according to preliminary reports. The multi-wave, hours-long strike leaves a grim picture about Iran’s air defence. Iran’s state media initially played down the impact, claiming that Iran had successfully thwarted the attack. But after Ayatollah Khamenei, the 85-year-old Supreme Leader, said Tehran should neither exaggerate nor downplay the damages caused by the attack, Iran said it “will use all available tools to deliver a definite and effective response to the Zionist regime ”.
There is no parity between Israel and Iran when it comes to conventional military capabilities. Israel, the only nuclear power in West Asia, has U.S. protection and supplies. The Israeli Defense Forces fly the F-35, one of the world’s most advanced fighter jets, and have a multi-layered defensive shield. Iran is practically on its own. It has been under U.S. sanctions for decades. Its closest partners, Russia and China, have no appetite to get involved. Its axis of resistance, including Hamas and Hezbollah, is under fire. So, Israel clearly has an edge in long-distance warfare. Yet, Iran showed a greater risk appetite this year than in the past with two direct attacks on Israel. Its militias may be under attack but are not out, and can continue to bleed Israel by a thousand cuts. And in the event of an all-out war, Iran can weaponise the critical arteries of energy trade in the Gulf, plunging the world economy into darkness. Such an outcome is in nobody’s interest, which also explains why the U.S. dissuaded Israel from targeting Iran’s critical infrastructure. Iran might be tempted to retaliate, but that would only prolong the cycle of violence, taking the region a step closer to an all-out war. Instead, Iran, in the larger interests of itself and the region, should show strategic restraint. But one side’s restraint alone does not bring peace. It was Israel that took the war to Iran by attacking the Iranian embassy in Damascus on April 1 this year. For stability in West Asia, both sides should stay away from directly targeting each other.