Iran, Israel Trade Blows, Each Seeking To Signal Strength While Avoiding Escalation
Israel’s response to the unprecedented Iranian attack was more limited than many expected, suggesting an Israeli effort to reinstate deterrence without opening an all-out war
Following Iran’s large-scale attack on Israel on April 13, foreign leaders advised Israel against retaliation, suggesting that Israel’s successful interception of the Iranian missiles was itself enough of a triumph. Israel was warned that retaliatory strikes could inflame the already volatile situation in the Middle East, potentially opening another front and exacerbating violence from Hamas, Hizbullah, and the Houthis in Yemen.
But when Israel’s response to Iran materialized early Friday, it appeared less impactful than anticipated, allowing Iranian officials and state-run media to downplay the attack’s significance, at least for the time being.
Israel’s decision to respond to the Iranian attack through limited airstrikes may have decreased the immediate risk of escalation. While Israel continues to battle Hamas in Gaza and Hizbullah along the border with Lebanon, concerns about the opening of a third front have diminished.
The Media Line spoke to experts on the Middle East about the strategy behind Israel and Iran’s exchange of fire and what the attacks might mean for the region and globally.
We may have a strategic shift, the full ramifications of which we do not yet know
Meir Litvak, director of Tel Aviv University’s Alliance Center for Iranian Studies, told The Media Line that the effects of the Iranian and Israeli attacks remain to be seen.
“We may have a strategic shift, the full ramifications of which we do not yet know,” he said.
Litvak said that Iran’s strike was meant to communicate the Islamic Republic’s decreasing tolerance for Israeli attacks on Iranian interests.
The Iranian attack was just to show Israel and the US that they can do it, that the Islamic Republic can reach Israel with its weapons
Thamar E. Gindin, an Iran researcher at the University of Haifa’s Ezri Center for Iran and Gulf States Research, agreed that the Iranian attack was meant to send a message.
“The Iranian attack was just to show Israel and the US that they can do it, that the Islamic Republic can reach Israel with its weapons,” Gindin told The Media Line.
Rand Fishbein, former staffer for the US Senate subcommittees on defense appropriations and foreign operations appropriations, told The Media Line that the Iranian attack was meant to demonstrate Iran’s strength and capabilities, especially to Iranian allies.
“Iran wanted to prove to its proxies that it had skin in the game rather than just funding them,” Fishbein said. “Hizbullah and Hamas are losing some people, and there was probably a sense among the ‘bad guys’ that everybody has to bleed a little bit, including Iran.”
Gindin said that Iran was most likely not surprised that the attack was intercepted, seeing as the drones launched from Iran took nine hours to reach Israel.
Fishbein, on the other hand, said that Iran might have genuinely sought to deal a severe blow to Israel.
“The divisions between the Biden Administration and Israel that have cropped up in recent weeks and, I would even say, years, I think, signal to Iran that this is a unique opportunity,” he said.
Fishbein said that the increasing divide between the US and Israel might have led Iran to think that Israel would be an easier target, not recognizing that Israel still has broad American support.
He emphasized the importance of the US-Israeli alliance in addressing the threat from Iran.
“The military approach seems to be the only viable option, and it has the potential to rejuvenate and revitalize the Middle East,” he said. “Moreover, it can enable the Iranian people to elect a new government.”
Gindin described recent events between Iran and Israel as a “game of honor.”
“Both sides need to show that they did something,” Gindin said. After Israel “crossed the line” by killing seven senior members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in a strike on the Iranian Consulate in Damascus, Iran felt that it had to respond in kind, she explained.
Israel … hit the air defense, making it clear: We can touch anything, we can reach out, we have a long arm, and we can do it.
Fishbein attributed the dueling attacks to “alpha male syndrome.” “Sometimes international relations are no more complicated than two bullies on a playground,” he said.
Israel responded to the Iranian attack with a limited strike on an Iranian military base. According to Litvak, that strike was meant to send two messages: both “We can attack you, you’re vulnerable” and “We don’t want escalation.”
“I think it was a wise response,” Fishbein said. By attacking the air defense, Israel made it clear: “We can touch anything, we can reach out, we have a long arm, and we can do it.”
Gindin said that both Israel and Iran have signaled their desire to avoid escalation.
“It looks like Iran is not interested in escalation as well,” she said. “Both sides know it would drag the whole region to a war, maybe even a world war, and we don’t want that.”
Both countries’ attempts to bolster their reputations while avoiding serious escalation have led to convoluted messaging around the attacks. Iran, for example, was able to paint its strike on Israel as a success because of the message it sent to Israel, even though the vast majority of Iranian missiles were intercepted, Litvak said.
Israel’s interception of the attack represented both a technological advancement and a diplomatic success, with several Arab countries helping Israel fend off the attack.
“The fact that the Saudis and the Jordanians came up with some support is, hopefully, the evolution of a regional alliance … of Arab states with Israel vis-à-vis Iran,” Litvak said.
Even as Litvak praised various Arab countries’ support of Israel during the Iranian strike, he warned against the assumption that the same coalition would necessarily support Israel in a future attack.
“There is no certainty that this coalition will work again,” he said. “Let’s say, should there be another attack, will Jordan take the risk? This is not certain.”
