Israel, which received a retaliatory attack from Iran, decided to respond with a ‘low-intensity counterattack’ that would not trigger an all-out war. However, as Israel predicts ‘painful retaliation’ against Iran, political instability in the Middle East is expected to continue. Iran attacked mainland Israel on the night of the 13th (local time) using 170 drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles. The Israeli military intercepted 99% of them, but some ballistic missiles fell at the southern Nevatim air base.
Political considerations… Refrain from escalating the war
The Iranian ballistic missile intercepted by the Israeli military was unveiled at the Julis Military Base on the 16th. Iran launched approximately 350 missiles and suicide drones targeting Israel on the 13th and 14th. On the 16th, the Times of Israel reported, “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened a second war cabinet meeting to discuss countermeasures against Iran and decided to focus on Iran’s proxy forces, such as Hezbollah.” According to Israel’s Khan radio broadcast, Prime Minister Netanyahu said at a meeting with ruling party ministers the previous day, “We must respond smartly to Iran’s drone and missile attacks.”
American media, including CNN and the Washington Post, also reported, “Israel is considering retaliation at a level that will send a message to Iran but will not cause casualties.” Iranian state media also reported, “The Israeli government has conveyed its intention to avoid being drawn into the conflict with Jordan, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).”
Israel’s choice of a low-level response appears to have taken into account domestic and international politics. It is believed that expanding the overseas front, even though no deaths have occurred, may result in political backlash at home. Israel must first resolve the conflict with the Palestinian armed faction Hamas in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. In the international community, Israel is also receiving strong criticism due to the attack on Gaza, which resulted in 33,000 deaths. We also took into account that the United States strongly opposes a direct attack on Iran. It is realistically difficult to strike Iran through the airspace of Middle Eastern countries without the help of the United States.
There is also an analysis that they chose to take a breather from a long-term perspective. Israel is seeking to form an ‘anti-Iran coalition’ by gaining the trust of Sunni pro-American Arab countries, such as Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
Woody Somer, a political science professor at the City University of New York, mentioned the case of the 1991 Gulf War in an interview with WP. It is pointed out that if Israel, which was attacked by Iraq’s Scud missile at the time, had counterattacked, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc. would have left the coalition and the US military would have been in trouble. “Israel has achieved far greater international benefits by being patient,” Professor Somer said.
Cyber attacks, terrorist operations, etc.
Attention is also drawn to the method of ‘painful retaliation’ mentioned by Israel.
Foreign media are reporting various observations, including military attacks on armed forces and military facilities inside and outside Iran, cyber attacks, and terrorist operations. Plans to increase the intensity of the ‘shadow war’ are being discussed, such as using spy operations and irregular forces to attack Iranian assets and drone factories in third countries such as Syria and Lebanon, or to assassinate important figures.
However, some are concerned that Israel may launch a surprise attack after reassuring its neighbors and allies. In 1981, Israel deceived Jordan and Saudi Arabia and passed through their airspace to attack and blow up Iraq’s Osirak nuclear power plant. On this day, Rafael Grossi, Secretary-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said of the possibility of Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, saying, “We are concerned about that possibility, and we must exercise extreme restraint.”
Reporter Lee Hyun-il hiuneal@hankyung.com
