The bitter conflict between Israel and Iran has long been confined to the realm of secret assassinations, audacious cyberattacks, nuclear sabotage and war-by-proxy. But that largely covert struggle burst into full view over the weekend with Tehran’s retaliatory drone and missile strikes.
The Islamic Republic’s unprecedented direct attack on the Jewish state, which followed Israel’s deadly strike on Iran’s consular building in Syria, left the United States and its allies scrambling to avoid a wider conflict as the world waits to see what comes next.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war Cabinet convened Monday to weigh its options. Western leaders have urged restraint, with President Joe Biden warning his Israeli counterpart against carrying out new strikes on Iran and making it clear that Washington would not join in any such counterattack. (Speaking after the war Cabinet convened, an Israeli official told NBC News that a response may be “imminent.”)
While almost all the drones and missiles used in the attack were taken down by Israel, the U.S. and other allied countries, the stakes after the attack could not be higher. In the eyes of some foreign policy hawks, the attacks could be perceived as a grave provocation that demands a furious rejoinder. But other analysts have warned that if Netanyahu decides to hit back hard, it could plunge the wider Middle East into war amid Israel’s devastating monthslong military campaign in the Gaza Strip.
Complicating matters, Iran’s intentions are not entirely clear. In the days after the attacks, some analysts have argued that its aerial barrage seemed primarily designed to bolster its position with domestic hard-liners and deter regional foes, but calibrated not to lead to a more sweeping war.
“Iran understands it’s relatively weak in the region, and so it had to make sure that whatever action it took was sufficiently significant to send a very strong message but not so successful that it would invite retaliation not only from Israel, but from Israel’s allies,” Rodger Shanahan, a Middle East analyst based in Australia, said in a phone interview Monday from Lebanon.
William F. Wechsler, senior director of Middle East Programs at the Atlantic Council, an international affairs think tank, similarly argued that the nature of Tehran’s retaliatory mission was telling.
“Iran sent an unmistakable signal that it wanted to avoid a further escalation that could spark a truly regional war,” Wechsler said in an analysis. “It chose long-range attacks that could be readily thwarted by known Israeli defenses and pointedly did not target any U.S. facilities.”
Tehran — which does not officially recognize Israel’s existence, has long championed the Palestinian cause and celebrated Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack as a “victory” — worked to frame its weekend strikes as a “legitimate” and “responsible” reaction to Israel bombing its consulate in Syria. The West should be “grateful” for Iran’s restraint, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanaani said on Monday.
Yet some in Tehran have described the Saturday attack in more drastic terms. “We have decided to create a new equation” with Israel, the chief of the country’s Revolutionary Guard Corps said.
Israel has battled its arch-enemy Iran through clandestine operations and proxy forces, as well as warning Tehran over its intentions as it develops its nuclear programs. (Iran has long insisted that its nuclear program is peaceful — a claim Israel rejects.)
Through its proxies, most notably Hezbollah, the powerful and well-armed political party and militant group in Lebanon, Iran has struck at Israel. But before Saturday, neither side had openly and directly attacked the other at home.
“The region is entering uncharted territory where the…
This article was originally published by a www.nbcnews.com . Read the Original article here. .