Both sides have a chance to de-escalate their conflict, at least for now
|DUBAI AND JERUSALEM
BOTH WERE aerial strikes on military bases, but the similarities end there. The Iranian barrage of more than 300 missiles and drones aimed at Israel on April 13th—its response to the deadly air strike two weeks earlier at the Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus—could not have been more public. Officials announced it whilst the projectiles were still in flight, and their path across the Middle East was tracked by social-media videos that showed them streaking across the night sky.
Israel’s apparent retaliation five nights later, on the other hand, was shrouded in the fog of war. Hours after it began, there has been no official confirmation from Israel, and only the sketchiest details have emerged from Iran. The strike was of a limited scale so Iran may not feel compelled to retaliate again. Still, after decades of clandestine warfare, the Middle East’s two strongest powers have now exchanged blows on each other’s territory—an ominous precedent.
What is clear is that, in the early hours of April 19th, Iran activated its air defences at an air base near the central city of Isfahan. It also temporarily grounded flights in Isfahan and several other locations, including the capital, Tehran. Unnamed American officials leaked that Israel had fired missiles at its longtime foe, though other reports point to it using a small number of drones.
Iran sought to downplay the incident. A state-television correspondent told viewers that everything was calm in Isfahan and that the explosions heard by residents were from Iranian air defences, not incoming projectiles. A spokesman for Iran’s space agency said that three small drones had been shot down and the attack foiled. Social-media accounts linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) circulated stock photos of tiny quadcopters to mock the size of the attack.
Oil markets shrugged it off too. The price of Brent crude jumped by more than $3, to above $90 a barrel, amid the first reports of explosions in Iran. As more details emerged, though, it pared those gains, and by mid-afternoon in the Middle East it was trading slightly below the previous day’s price.
Isfahan is home to a missile-production complex that researches and builds many of Iran’s ballistic weapons. It also houses some of Iran’s F-14s, which are half a century old but are still among the most sophisticated fighter jets in its arsenal. There was thus a certain symmetry in the tit-for-tat strikes, since Iran’s barrage aimed ballistic missiles at an Israeli air base that hosts the country’s advanced F-35 jets.
The city is also home to parts of Iran’s clandestine nuclear programme (though the most important bits are elsewhere). In recent years Iran has produced an ever-larger stash of enriched uranium, some of it to near weapons-grade. Early rumours that Israel had targeted nuclear facilities on April 19th seem inaccurate, however. The International Atomic Energy Agency said there was “no damage” to Iran’s nuclear sites.
Some Iranian analysts have questioned the quadcopter story. Such drones have a range of only a few kilometres, while Isfahan is more than 300km from any land or sea border (and 1,500km from Israel). But they have been used before as part of shadowy attacks on arms factories in Iran—presumably deployed by Israeli agents inside the country.
Given the scale of the Iranian attack on April 13th, it was all but certain that Israel would retaliate. It had a range of options, from a major strike that matched Iran’s in scale to covert operations or cyber-attacks. By choosing direct yet symbolic action it hopes to strike a balance: signalling that it is capable of hitting Iran and not deterred from doing so, but without forcing Iran to hit back. Israel deviated from its usual policy and notified America of the plan in advance. It hopes to preserve the American-led coalition, which includes several Arab countries, that helped it fend off the Iranian missiles and drones.
Hours before the apparent Israeli strike Hossein Amirabdollahian, the Iranian foreign minister, told CNN that his country’s response to any further Israeli attack would be “immediate and at a maximum level”. By pretending no attack even happened, Iran buys room to manoeuvre. Still, behind the scenes, some hawks—like Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the head of the IRGC’s missile force—are probably urging a response.
Even if this round is over, though, both countries may be unable to go back to fighting in the shadows. Iran raised the stakes by launching a direct attack from its territory—setting a new precedent the next time Israel tries to assassinate members of the IRGC. This is yet another complication for Israel’s war cabinet, which is already planning an attack on Hamas’s last remaining stronghold in Gaza and a possible campaign against Hizbullah in Lebanon.
It took a series of tempestuous cabinet meetings, and at least two aborted operations, until the Israelis decided on their response against Iran. Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, is operating within narrow constraints. His international allies, led by America, have been urging restraint. Meanwhile some of his ministers have called for a more devastating move.
They have been told to keep mum about the strike on April 19th. But Itamar Ben-Gvir, the far-right national-security minister, posted a single word on social media—dardale—a term which, in Israeli sport, refers to a half-hearted and harmless kick towards the other side’s goal. Such goading is meant to pressure Mr Netanyahu not only to take more forceful action against Iran, but also to escalate operations in Gaza, where Israel’s deployment is at its smallest in the past six months. The prime minister may be cautious about the former, lest he overstretch Israel’s army and anger its allies.
The latter is more likely. An offensive in Rafah, a city where an estimated 1.5m displaced Palestinians are now huddled, would almost certainly cause large numbers of casualties. It has so far been delayed by international pressure, but the Israeli army is now making preparations to drop leaflets calling on civilians to leave Rafah for “safe areas” (which are not yet equipped to handle an influx of desperate people). Not for the first time, the people of Gaza may have to pay for the Iranian-Israeli conflict.■