More than 48 hours after Israel launched a massive and well-planned offensive against Iran, where do we stand? Pre-emptive strikes. Reprisal attacks. Neutralising operations. Aggression. Whatever the nomenclature one prefers, the reality is clear. The regional conflict that many feared for the past couple of years is finally here. Though Israel and Iran are the principal actors, their aerial attacks—via aircraft, missiles and drones—have been violating the sovereign airspaces of Jordan, Syria and Iraq, if not other countries.
With its prime intention of reversing nuclear ambitions, Israel has focused on the Iranian nuclear installations and its top nuclear scientists. Principal facilities in Natanz, Arak, Khondab, Khorramabad, Isfahan, Shiraz, and perhaps Fardo were attacked with varying degrees of damage. Some Israeli reports suggest that over two dozen Iranian nuclear scientists were targeted, with several key figures succumbing to their injuries. Israel also targeted the top echelons of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the army—including the chief of staff, heads of the aerospace and Al-Quds Force and missile, intelligence and operational force commanders. Iran was quick to appoint successors to some of these key positions, but knowledgeable observers have noticed that the new appointees either lack the experience of their predecessors or are without a strong IRGC background—suggesting a shrinking bench strength within the military.
Paths paved to Tehran
There are suggestions that the Israeli offensive would remove any remaining restraint and compel Iran to follow in the footsteps of North Korea and go nuclear. Such a strategy might be domestically popular, justifiable for the Axis of Resistance and might be understood by some friends of Iran. However, it will also be suicidal. A nuclear Iran will be the post facto justification for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s onslaught. Though the extent of damages to the Iranian nuclear facilities and possible radiation leaks are too early to assess, the reported killing of key scientists would slow down—if not push back—the Iranian nuclear programme by a few years.
Not accepting the aggression, Iran was quick to launch a wave of drone and missile attacks against Israel. The magnitude is smaller than many had feared, but still lethal. The time-tested home front preparations, including sealed rooms and bunkers, have managed to limit human casualties in Israel. However, the physical damage has been considerable and could contribute to panic and fatigue of the wider public.
In the initial phase, Israel was targeting Iran’s military bases, ballistic missiles and missile fuel storage facilities and air and naval bases. However, the explicit targeting of civilians by Iranian projectiles appeared to have pushed Israel to expand the scope of its operations and start attacking Iran’s economic and strategic targets, such as gas fields, oil refineries, and storage facilities.
Interestingly, the conflict also exposed Iran’s soft belly. While it possesses an arsenal of drones and missiles—many of which were developed indigenously—its defensive capabilities are not particularly impressive. On the second day of the conflict, senior Israeli officials claimed that “paths have been paved” to Tehran. This implies greater freedom of aerial operations for Israel over the Iranian capital. Conceding air superiority to the adversary is the worst nightmare for any country. Egypt lost the 1967 June War in the early hours by conceding control of its airspace to Israel.
Also read: Israel-Iran conflict: India distances itself from SCO statement critical of Tel Aviv
Conflict within zero-sum paradigm
The international response has been along expected lines. Neither side has any strong, vocal supporters. Even the Trump administration—known for its pro-Israeli disposition—has been reluctant to rally behind Netanyahu. However, there are speculations that some Western countries and regional players are providing tacit assistance to Israel at three levels: intercepting Iranian drones that violate their airspace, tactical support, and by safekeeping some of Israel’s strategic assets. For larger regional compulsions, these countries are playing down their actual roles in support of Israel.
Iran is also getting less support from its traditional allies. Over the past couple of years, particularly since the 7 October attacks, the powers and influence of the Axis of Resistance have diminished considerably. Hamas and Hezbollah, which pushed Iran’s regional agenda for over two decades, are significantly weakened. Tehran also lost its military influence in Syria following the fall of Bashar al-Assad. Its allies in Iraq—Popular Mobilization Force—are also facing domestic unrest over the Persian meddling in Iraqi affairs. The Houthis—whose missile capabilities are directly linked to Iran—made a deal with the Trump administration and are facing attacks from the Israeli air force and naval flotilla in the Red Sea. In other words, its proxies are too weak to be of any help to Iran in expanding its fight against Israel.
There are increasing speculations that Israel is prepared for the next stage of escalation and might go after Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Hosseini Khamenei. This is where Netanyahu’s regime change agenda needs to be situated. Post-Khamenei political order will be chaotic and unclear. He quickly became the Supreme Leader following the death of Ayatollah Khomeini in 1989; however, this may not be the case this time, as there are several uncertainties and competitors. Some even question the need for the office of Supreme Leader.
As the conflict intensifies and expands, no power has the capacity, desire or diplomatic acumen to intervene, mediate, or counsel the warring parties. Netanyahu and Khamenei frame their conflict within the zero-sum paradigm and are unlikely to heed any outside advice. Thus, until they realise the futility and silence the guns, no one can predict the outcome. This is the harsh reality of the ongoing Israel-Iran war.
Professor P R Kumaraswamy teaches contemporary Middle East at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He tweets @kumaraswamyJNU. Views are personal.
(Edited by Ratan Priya)
Israel has time and again single-handedly defeated the alliance of Arab nations.
Sure it can do the same to Tehran and it’s allies too. It would be fun watching Israeli tanks roll into Tehran.
India must stand by Israel in it’s hour of need.