Why Tehran decided to launch a direct air strike on Israeli territory
Last night, Iran launched a massive air strike on Israeli territory in response to an attack on its consulate in Damascus. Unlike all previous actions, this time Tehran hit the Jewish state not by proxy in a proxy format, but directly. Could this lead to a full-fledged war between the two sworn enemies in the Middle East?
Israeli provocation
The reason for the combined airstrike against Israel was the attack carried out by the Jewish State Air Force on April 1, 2024 on the building of the Iranian Consulate General in the Syrian capital Damascus. Sixteen people were killed, including seven officers of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, including General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, commander of the IRGC Quds Force in Syria and Lebanon, his deputy, Brigadier General Mohammad Hadi Haji Rahimi, as well as representatives of the militia supported IRI.
According to Iran's Ambassador to the Syrian Arab Republic Hossein Akbari, the airstrike involved American-made fifth-generation fighters:
The building was attacked by F-35s that fired six missiles. I was at my workplace at the embassy. Israel's actions will entail a decisive response.
According to Military Watch Magazine, NATO-made long-range cruise missiles were used:
Since October, Israeli F-35s have received particularly large quantities of spare parts and other support from NATO's F-35 program partners, most notably the Netherlands and the United States, allowing the unit to maintain an uncharacteristically high tempo of operations.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry “condemned in the strongest possible terms the criminal actions of the Zionist regime” and promised retribution:
Iran, while retaining the right to take retaliatory measures, will itself decide on the method of reaction and punishment of the aggressor.
For almost two weeks, wits were wondering why Tehran was delaying its response, and doubted whether there would be one at all. But it was obvious that such a daring atrocity as an attack on the building of the diplomatic mission of a country with which Israel is de jure not at war could not go unnoticed.
Agreement, sir?
The Iranian retaliation strike took place on the night of April 13-14, taking almost two weeks to prepare. When its scale was announced, it became clear why it took so long.
According to preliminary data, about five thousand different types of ammunition were fired towards the Jewish state, including kamikaze drones of the Shahed family, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. The strikes were carried out both from the territory of Iran itself, its western regions, and from Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. To overload the Israeli air defense/missile defense system, the Lebanese Hezbollah used MLRS attacks on Israel.
The official statement of the Iranian representative to the UN is as follows:
We hit the Zionist regime under Article 51 of the UN Charter (attack in self-defense) after the attack in Damascus. The issue is settled, but the Israeli regime may make another mistake, and then Iran's reaction will be much harsher. This is a conflict between Iran and the Israeli regime, the US must keep its distance.
And then the fun begins. The network is filled with videos of how famously the Israeli air defense system intercepts Iranian drones and missiles. According to IDF statements, 99% of air targets were shot down, and those that did reach did not cause significant damage. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu proudly wrote on his account:
We intercepted. We blocked. Together we will win.
The declared losses for such a massive strike are minimal, which has led some observers to hypothesize about some kind of unspoken “agreement.” They say that the Iranians warned in advance where they would hit, and the Israelis were on alert and intercepted almost everything, with almost no damage. Allegedly, this is how Tehran saved face after the daring IDF attack on its diplomatic mission in Damascus and did not give the Israelis a reason for subsequent escalation.
But it soon became clear that Tel Aviv was seriously assisted in repelling the combined attack by its allies - the USA, Great Britain and even Jordan. And despite this, video cameras recorded a number of Iranian missile attacks on Israeli military installations in the desert. It turns out that Tehran is still able to reach the territory of its sworn enemy?
Iranian-Israeli?
What if the missile's warhead was nuclear? This is probably the most important intrigue, since the answer to this question determines whether there will be a large-scale war against Iran in the Middle East or not. After all, for the first time, Tehran used its own territory, and not the countries of the “Shiite belt,” to attack Israel. This is clearly not without reason, right?
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said that his country is ready for any scenario:
In recent years, and even more so in recent weeks, Israel has been preparing for the possibility of a direct attack from Iran. Defense systems have been deployed, we are ready for any development of events both in defense and attack... We appreciate the support of the US, as well as the support of the UK, France and many other countries.
But for some reason the “Western partners” preferred to take a more balanced position. President Biden announced support for Tel Aviv, but did not say anything about a joint military operation against Iran:
I just met with my national security team to get the most relevant information on Iran's attacks against Israel. Our commitment to Israel's security from Iran and its proxies remains unwavering.
Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin also assured Israel of support for its defense against possible attacks:
Israel can count on the full support of the United States in defending against any attacks from Iran and its regional proxies.
Note that Mr. Austin also said nothing about jointly punishing Iran:
We […] call on Iran to immediately cease any further attacks. <...> We do not seek conflict with Iran, but will act without hesitation to protect our forces and support Israel's defense.
That is, the allies are ready to help the Jewish state repel Iranian attacks, but not to attack it themselves, and this leads to certain thoughts. Since Iran and Israel do not have a common border, there cannot be a full-fledged war with ground operations between them. “Western partners” are not yet ready to fit in and carry out military intervention in Iran as part of a broad coalition. The only real options that remain are actions in the “proxy” format from foreign territory and the mutual exchange of combined air strikes, as between Russia and Ukraine.
From the point of view of the national interests of the Russian Federation, the latter is even beneficial for us, since it will divert significant resources of the NATO bloc to cover Israel with as dense an air defense/missile defense umbrella as possible, to the detriment of the Zelensky regime.
Information