New Delhi:Since 07 Oct last year, West Asia has been on the boil. Israel has been battling Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthi and a host of Iran’s proxies spread across Iraq and Syria. Attacks on Israeli citizens by Hamas on 07 Oct was the ignition. Israel initially sought to deal with Hamas in Gaza, however, support from Hezbollah compelled it to expand the conflict to include Lebanon. Israel was avoiding enlarging the conflict aiming to keep it localized, however, Iran’s unmistakable support to these groups compelled Israel to risk escalation.
On the first of April this year, Israel targeted an Iranian diplomatic facility in Damascus killing seven Iranian IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) officers. Iran was compelled to retaliate. Had it ignored the attack, it would have emboldened Israel while showing the Iranian leadership in a poor light. Simultaneously, if the attack had resulted in serious casualties, it would have expanded the conflict.
Missiles launched from Iran towards Israel streak across the night sky as seen from Deir al-Balah, Gaza Strip, Tuesday, (AP) Iran launched a barrage of over 300 missiles and drones from its soil on Israel on 13th April. It gave sufficient warning as also only targeted military bases. Its intent was not to enlarge the conflict but to subdue internal pressures while sending a message that it would strike in case pushed to the wall. Most of its missiles and drones were destroyed in flight. Israel retaliated with a similar limited strike on 19th April, destroying an Iranian S-300 missile system, while avoiding casualties. Tel Aviv's messaging was that future targets could be Iran’s strategic installations. The conflict came to an end.
Recent Israeli attacks on Lebanon including the killing of top leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah, reignited tensions between Iran and Israel. Iran did not react when the leader of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, was killed in Tehran. This possibly emboldened Tel Aviv. It was the killing of Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah alongside Iran’s Brigadier General Abbas Nilforoushan, as well as Israel’s ground offensive into Lebanon which forced it to act. Tehran came under pressure from its proxies. Failure to act would imply a loss of control over the Hezbollah.
Rockets are seen over Jerusalem as a siren sounds a warning of incoming missiles fired from Iran, in Jerusalem (AP) While talks of peace were ongoing, Israel was not under any pressure from the US to cease its attacks against Lebanon and Gaza. There are inputs that Israel and the Hezbollah were close to a peace deal. However, this would have prevented Israel from attacking Hezbollah and reducing its military power. It is now evident that there would be no peace. Israel is being permitted to continue its attacks as it had been harmed by the 07 Oct attacks and possessed the right to strike back. Simultaneously, Iran was being deterred from expanding the conflict.
In its latest assault, Iran launched about 200 ballistic missiles on Israeli military targets, giving prior information to the West via Russia. This time the advance warning was that of a few hours. Most missiles were destroyed in flight. As per Israeli sources, there was little damage on the ground. Tehran stated that it had no intention to expand the conflict and would only act if Israel struck back. Iran is aware that its military is weaker than Israel, which is backed by the West. Iran only possesses diplomatic support from Russia and China.
Israel swore to retaliate. While the US claims that Israel has the right to retaliate, it has not given it sanctions to target Iran’s nuclear facilities, which have always remained a matter of concern for Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, who is determined to destroy them. Netanyahu mentioned, ‘Iran made a big mistake tonight - and it will pay for it.’
Fireworks explode next a portrait of slain Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and a minaret of a mosque in an anti-Israeli gathering celebrating Iran's missile strike against Israel, at Felestin (Palestine) Sq. in Tehran, Iran on Tuesday (AP) While Israel may have a powerful military being a small nation lacks strategic depth and hence would prefer keeping operations away from its soil as well as enlarging buffer zones. Its current operations in Lebanon are aimed at creating a buffer zone to protect its population living close to the border.
Iran, though large in size has, by its actions, alienated most Arab states and hence is unlikely to gain any sympathy or support from them in case of an Israeli strike on its soil. Its proxies have earlier targeted Saudi Arabian and UAE oil facilities. Tehran may have re-established ties with Riyadh, but there is no love lost. No nation is also likely to come to its support. The Iranian ambassador to India stated that since India has close ties with both, Iran and Israel, it can ‘convince Israel to stop the war.’
Further, Iran, aware of its limitations, has never sought a conflict with Israel. Its intent has only been to bleed Israel with missile and drone strikes through its proxies. Thus, neither Iran nor Hezbollah, opened a new front while Israel was clearing the Hamas in Gaza. All they did was launch rockets to keep Israel under pressure. They also did not want to draw the US into the conflict. Israel exploited this weakness and enlarged the conflict with Hezbollah after it gained control of Gaza, with the Hamas largely weakened. With Gaza still simmering, will Israel’s attack on Hezbollah succeed is unknown. Its earlier attempts had failed.
Israelis wait to re-board their bus after projectiles were launched from Iran are being intercepted in the skies over in Rosh HaAyin, Israel on Tuesday, (AP) Further, there appears to be acceptance in the fact that a regime change in Tehran would be beneficial in the long term not only for Israel and the US but also for the region. But that is unlikely to be easy, though Netanyahu has been hinting towards it.
However, in case Israel’s counterstrike causes severe damage to Iran’s strategic assets, Tehran has the ability to cause turmoil in West Asia. Its proxies or Iran itself can target oil facilities in the region, impacting the global economy. On the other hand, Israel has its hands full. It is battling Hezbollah and the Houthis alongside a depleted Hamas. Netanyahu may have hurt the Hezbollah by its air strikes and pager blasts but the Hezbollah is far from done.
In this scenario, Israel cannot commence an aerial war against Iran. However, Tel Aviv has to retaliate to Iran’s actions or else it would send a wrong message. The nature of retaliation would determine its intent of expanding the conflict or keeping it localized. The world waits as Israel plans its strikes. An enlarged conflict could impact oil supplies hurting the global economy.
India is developing Iran’s Chabahar port. This is unlikely to be an Israeli target. Thus far, India has refrained from commenting against any party in the conflict but sought dialogue and restraint. The coming week would determine how the situation in West Asia would evolve.
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of ETV Bharat)
