What Explains Israel’s Surprisingly Restrained Retaliation Against Iran?
Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter
It's becoming very difficult for Israel and Iran to balance their own hawks’ demands, domestic public perception, and the perception of their opponent’s policymakers (which include hawkish elements).
Israel finally retaliated against Iran on Friday for Iran’s own prior retaliation against Israel earlier this month, which the Islamic Republic carried out against the self-professed Jewish State in an attempt to restore deterrence, in the second round of their dangerous tit-for-tat that first began in spring. Unlike Iran’s retaliation against Israel, Israel’s retaliation against Iran wasn’t widely filmed. It was also surprisingly restrained despite lots of earlier hype and concerns about an uncontrollable escalation.
No critical infrastructure, including Iran’s sole nuclear reactor and its oil refineries, was directly targeted but the New York Times cited unnamed sources from both countries to report that Israel destroyed surrounding air defenses in order to leave Iran open to a more painful attack if it retaliates to this one. Axios also reported that Israel warned Iran about its attack in advance via third parties in an attempt to deter retaliation that could risk everything spiraling into a larger conflict depending on how it plays out.
Iran announced that four of its soldiers had been killed and reaffirmed its right to respond. A high-ranking source reportedly told Tasnim that Iran is ready to do precisely that, though Sky News Arabia cited an anonymous source to report that Iran informed Israel via third parties that it won’t do so. Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post reported that Israel does indeed expect retaliation, but it might be carried out via Iran’s regional allies in the Resistance Axis. It’s therefore unclear what’ll happen next.
