Analysts said on Friday that the relatively limited scope of Israel’s nighttime attacks on Iran and the mild response from Iranian officials may have reduced the likelihood of an immediate escalation in fighting between the two countries.
There have been concerns for days that a forceful Israeli response to Iran’s weekend attacks on southern Israel could trigger a more aggressive Iranian counterattack that could turn a tit-for-tat confrontation into a wider war. Foreign leaders have advised Israel to view its successful defense against Iranian missile attacks as a victory that does not require retaliation, and have warned Israel against counterattacks that could further destabilize the region.
But when it finally arrived early Friday, the Israeli attack appeared to be less serious than expected, leading Iranian officials and state-run news media to downplay its significance, at least initially.
Iranian officials said no enemy aircraft were detected in Iranian airspace and that the main attacks on military bases in central Iran were launched by small drones that were likely launched from Iranian territory.There is even a precedent for the nature of the attack: Israel used Similar methods in attacks on military installations In Isfahan early last year.
By sunrise, Iran’s state-run news media was expected to quickly return to normal, broadcasting calm street scenes while officials publicly denied the impact of the attack. The airport also reopened after a brief overnight closure.
Analysts warned that any outcome was still possible. But Iran’s initial reaction suggested that Iranian leaders would not rush to respond, despite warnings in recent days that they would respond forcefully and swiftly to any Israeli attack.
“The way they presented the information to their own people, and the fact that the skies were open, made them decide not to respond,” said Sima Shine, a former research director at Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence agency. Iran expert.
But, she added, “We made a lot of assessment errors, so I’m very hesitant to say that explicitly.”
in a misjudgment What triggered this round of violence was Israel’s attack on the Iranian embassy compound in Syria on April 1, killing seven Iranian officials, including three senior commanders.
Israel has launched similar attacks on Iran and Iranian interests in Syria over the years without provoking a direct response from Iran. But the scale of the attacks appears to have changed Iran’s tolerance, with Iranian leaders warning they will no longer accept Israeli attacks against Iranian interests anywhere in the region. Early on April 14, Iran launched more than 300 missiles and drones at Israel, causing little damage, but the scale of the attack shocked the Israelis.
Shin said that even if Iran did not respond in a similar manner to Israel’s latest attack on Friday, it would still likely respond forcefully to future Israeli attacks on Iranian assets in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East.
The possibility became more pressing earlier on Friday when Syrian authorities said Israel had struck again at a site in Syria in conjunction with an attack on Iran.
Israel did not claim responsibility for the attack, in line with its policy of not commenting on such attacks. But if the attack harms Iran’s interests, and if Iran blames the attack on Israel, it’s unclear how Tehran will respond.
“The question is whether they will stick to the red line,” Ms. Shine said. “But what exactly are red lines? Are they only for high-status people? Are they only for embassies? Or are they for all Iranian targets in Syria?”
Jonathan Rice and Rawan Sheikh Ahmed Contributed reporting.
