The almost 200 long-range and ballistic rockets fired at Israel by Iran’s regime Tuesday night took just 12 minutes or so to cross the desert separating the two arch-enemies, but the implications of the strike will likely be felt for years.
Faced with humiliating losses that Israel inflicted on their closest proxy, Hezbollah, and with hope of a ceasefire in Lebanon and Gaza exhausted, it appears Iran’s Islamic rulers decided confronting Israel directly was their least-worst option.
“This is a dangerous gamble here,” Sanam Vakil, a Middle East analyst with Chatham House in London, told BBC Radio’s Today program in the aftermath of the strikes.
“Iran recognized that without trying to inflict damage and restore some deterrence, it would continue to get hit by Israel, and that’s what it is trying to achieve here.”
The decimation or debilitation of its key proxies — Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza and the Houthis in Yemen — means Iran’s capability to project its influence in the Middle East, and of confronting the West and Israel, has been dealt a crushing blow.
Iran launched a series of ballistic missiles at Israel less than a week after the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and a day after ground operations started in Lebanon. The attack has added to fears of a wider conflict in the region.
Designed to inflict major damage
This was the second time in the past six months that Iran launched salvos of rockets at Israel, but unlike the previous strikes in April, these attacks appeared designed to cause maximum damage.
Rather than preceding the main strikes with slow-moving, easily intercepted drones, on Tuesday night, Iran used some of the most advanced ballistic missiles in its inventory, aiming at three Israeli military installations: military bases at Nevatim, Hatzerim and Tel Nof as well as the headquarters of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, in Tel Aviv.
Civilian buildings and neighbourhoods were not targeted, said Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araqch.
“Our action is concluded unless the Israeli regime decides to invite further retaliation. In that scenario, our response will be stronger and more powerful,” Araqchi said in a post on X early on Wednesday,
He said Iran only took the action, “[after] exercising tremendous restraint for almost two months, to give space for a ceasefire in Gaza.”
While it appears civilian casualties on the ground were few, a 37-year-old Palestinian labourer was killed near Jericho by falling shrapnel from Iranian missiles or Israeli interceptors.
Israeli response could target refineries
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu characterised Iran’s move as “a big mistake” with an Israeli response in the hours or days ahead a virtual certainty.
The implications of that response will be felt around the world, says Ahron Bregman, an Israeli military analyst and senior teaching fellow at King’s College London.
“The Israelis are hinting it will be something that will surprise the Iranians and surprise the world, and when I think of potential targets, what comes to mind is their oil refineries, which will have an impact on the Middle East but [also] on the world economy, and which would see oil prices rocketing,” said Bregman in an interview on France24.
But within Israel, hawkish voices are pushing for something even bolder: a strike on the country’s nuclear sites that they believe would weaken the Iranian regime for years.
Naftali Bennett, a former Israeli prime minister, urged the Netanyahu government not to hold back.
“Israel now has the greatest opportunity in 50 years to change the face of the Middle East,” he wrote on X.
“We must act now to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, its central energy facilities and to fatally cripple this terrorist regime.”
Israel has attacked the sites, or the area around them, before, most recently back in April in response to Iran’s earlier round of missiles launched against Israel.
Then the target was a sophisticated air defence system in Isfahan, close to where Iran’s nuclear program is headquartered. Some observers saw the choice of location as an explicit message to Iran that its nuclear facilities were easily within Israel’s military capabilities to destroy.
But such a move by Israel would carry enormous risks.
Destroying or damaging facilities Iran uses to enrich uranium would not undo the knowledge and experience Iran has gained, and some experts fear it could push Iran to develop nuclear weapons even more rapidly.
“Iran has built in some contingencies and taken much more of its facilities underground,” said Vakil, the Chatham House expert in London.
“The gains are there, the knowledge is there.”
CBC’s Ellen Mauro breaks down why Iran fired roughly 200 ballistic missiles into Israel and the potential consequences for the Middle East.
Polls suggest Israelis back recent actions in Lebanon
Then, there are the motivations and political calculations of the man who will make the ultimate decision on a response: Netanyahu.
Blamed and vilified by much of the Israeli public over the past year for first not stopping the Oct. 7 massacres by Hamas that killed around 1,200 people and for letting many of the 250 hostages taken that day languish in Gaza rather than agreeing to a deal that would bring them home, polls now suggest Netanyahu’s popularity has surged.
Israeli society appears roundly united behind its military’s assassination campaign of senior Hezbollah members in Lebanon, including the elimination of long-time enemy Hassan Nasrallah five days ago in an attack on his command headquarters in Beirut.
The cumulative attacks have gutted the Iran-backed militia, which was funded and equipped by Iran over the decades to be its first line of defence against Israel.
Over the past year, Netanyahu’s critics have accused him of drawing out the war against Hamas in Gaza to appease his far-right coalition partners that keep him in power.
Iran’s missile attack into Israel on Tuesday prompted some cheers in the streets of Beirut. The attack marks the latest escalation in the war between Iran and its proxy in Lebanon, Hezbollah.
Israeli observers say the prime minister now has a chance to redefine his legacy and take the focus off his Oct. 7 failures — by doing something even dramatic involving Iran.
“Clearly, the prime minister wants to survive politically,” said Eyal Zisser, a Middle East expert at Tel Aviv University, told CBC News in an interview.
“His popularity clearly increased dramatically after the severe blow to Hezbollah. So, he tells himself, ‘Maybe this is the right way.'”
Other analysts caution that Netanyahu’s personal and political hubris could end up undoing some of Israel’s tactical gains in Lebanon and beyond in recent weeks.
“Ultimately, Israel, if it hasn’t already, will overreach,” said Daniel Sobelman, assistant professor of international relations at Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
“Israel cannot single-handedly restructure the Middle East.”
U.S. President Joe Biden condemned Iran’s attacks on Tuesday, saying his national security team is in constant contact with Israeli counterparts. Meanwhile, Iran’s armed forces are warning of a ‘strong attack’ if Israel’s allies intervene. Two experts on Iran discuss whether that means a wider war is inevitable.