Iran is analyzed to have found practical benefits through a 'harmless' retaliatory airstrike against Israel. On the other hand, Israel, which holds the key to escalation that Western countries are concerned about, is evaluated to be on the international stage's testing ground regarding its future response plans.
The American daily newspaper The New York Times (NYT) reported, "Iran's attack on Israeli military facilities caused almost no damage to Israel," adding, "This is because Iran, reluctant to escalate the conflict, gave Israel and its allies several days in advance to prepare a strong defense posture." During this period, allies such as the United States and the United Kingdom deployed additional military assets to respond to Iran's attack, resulting in the interception of the vast majority of over 300 aerial weapons, including drones and missiles.
On the morning of the 14th (local time), an Iranian projectile fell and emitted light in the northern region of Israel. [Image source=EPA Yonhap News]
While the first Iranian attack on Israeli mainland is widely seen as signaling the end of the long-standing 'shadow war' between the two countries, there are claims that the attack was merely a warning measure. Iran even issued a statement before the attack ended, declaring that it had no plans to attack Israel further.
Until now, both countries have chosen methods of attack that do not openly reveal their presence, but given the increasingly blatant level of Israeli attacks, it is explained that Iran's actions were only to show that it will not remain passive.
For example, Israel not only bombed the Iranian consulate in Damascus, the capital of Syria, on the 1st of this month?an attack that directly triggered Iran's response?killing seven soldiers including Mohammad Reza Zahedi, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, but also assassinated Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Iran's top nuclear scientist, in 2020. In December last year, Israel was also accused of airstriking and killing Sayyed Raji Musavi, a senior Iranian general advising and supporting the Syrian government. The NYT explained, "Despite Israel's continued brazen assassination attacks, Iran did not retaliate," adding, "Iran's decision to respond this time was partially triggered by anger from some groups within Iranian society over the government's passive handling."
Ali Baez, an Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group (ICG), said, "(Regarding the incident where Israel killed seven Iranian soldiers) if Iran had not responded, it would have dealt a significant blow to the trust of the public and partners in the Iranian government," and added, "The bottom-up pressure on the regime to respond over the past ten days was at a level never seen before."
Experts expect that international public opinion will direct criticism toward Israel regarding Iran's recent attack. There is also an assessment that if Israel undertakes further retaliation, it could strain relations with major countries such as the United States, which do not want heightened tensions. Already, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has faced domestic and international criticism as the security failure responsible for allowing the surprise attack by the Palestinian armed group Hamas in July last year and for the killing of hostages.
Aaron David Miller, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a U.S. think tank, pointed out, "Israel has made two significant strategic errors within a year," and noted, "Conceptually, Israel is losing to Iran two to zero."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
