Foreshocks of a Bigger Middle East Earthquake?
Tomorrow will mark the first anniversary of the Hamas the Hamas onslaught of October 7 that left 1,200 Israelis dead. Since then Israel has been fighting its longest war. With nearly 42,000 dead and almost 100,000 wounded, mostly women and children, the tremors of the Gaza earthquake continue. The Strip has been reduced to rubble and winter is approaching. Moreover, some 800 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank. With the beginning of IDF operations, Lebanon is now the major battleground. IDF’s recent airstrikes in Lebanon have so far killed over 1,400 people and displaced more than 1,200,000. And the risks of Lebanon turning into a second Gaza are growing if strikes were to continue at this pace.
In previous posts, I have said that “Tehran would prefer to avoid an all-out war with Israel, but it would do its best to regroup and re-energize the “Axis of Resistance” to continue harassing Israel.” I still believe so. However, on Tuesday, Iran fired around 180 missiles at Israel, mostly ballistic missiles, not slower weapons such as drones and cruise missiles it used in its April 13 attack.
A few websites reported that the barrage had caused considerable damage in some Israeli bases including the loss of F-35 fighter aircraft. These were not confirmed, not yet at least. The IDF initially declined to provide the details of the damage done. The Washington Post reported on Thursday that, “While the latest attack’s impact was slightly greater than in April, no deaths were reported Tuesday within Israel. One Palestinian man was reported killed in the West Bank.”[i] But the next day, it reported that at least two dozen long-range Iranian ballistic missiles broke through Israeli and allied air defenses, striking or landing near at least three military and intelligence installations, according to a review of videos and photos of the attack and aftermath.[ii] It was widely reported in the Western media that Tehran wanted to do some serious damage and was after making a much more aggressive point.
After the attack, Iranian President Pezeshkian released a statement saying that Tehran is not seeking war but peace and security for Iran and the region. “Netanyahu should know that Iran is not seeking war, but it will stand firmly against any threat,” he added, “This is just a glimpse of our capabilities. Do not engage in conflict with Iran.”
More importantly, On Friday, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei delivered a sermon in Tehran.
In the first part of his sermon, he urged Islamic unity. He mentioned Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Palestine, and notably Egypt. He used extremely harsh language in his criticism of Israel and the US. He said that Israel will never defeat Hamas and Hezbollah, adding that the October 7 onslaught was “logical and legitimate”. As for Tuesday’s missile attack, he said, “What our armed forces did was the minimum punishment for the crimes of the usurping Zionist regime.”
In the second part of his sermon, delivered in Arabic, he praised Hezbollah and Hassan Nasrallah and then dwelt on the region’s challenges. He stated that despite spending billions of dollars in Gaza and Lebanon, and despite the comprehensive support given by the US and several other Western governments, the enemy has failed in its confrontation with several thousand fighters…” He defined the main problem facing the region as foreign interference. He accused the West of trying to turn Israel into a gateway for exporting energy from the Middle East to the Western world while facilitating the import of goods and technology from the West to the region, adding that “every blow to the Zionist regime by any individual or group is not only a service to the entire region but to all of humanity.”[iii]
His reference to a “gateway” was his response to what Prime Minister Netanyahu said in remarks to the UN General Assembly and the maps he showed. There, he had said, “ Israel and its Arab partners forming a land bridge connecting Asia and Europe. Between the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, across this bridge, we will lay rail lines, energy pipelines, and fiber optic cables, and this will serve the betterment of 2 billion people.”
Looking at what Iranian leadership has said and the damage done, one may conclude that the Iranian leadership, after the losses suffered by its proxies, was more after proving that it had not completely dropped out of the game than causing the kind of damage that would amount to a full declaration of war. Without a shadow of a doubt, the decision for the missile attack once again divided Tehran’s hardlines and moderates with the former prevailing. Iran’s leadership must know that their regional support is confined to the adversaries of Israel and, despite the glories of Persian history, the global appeal of their clerical regime is next to zero.
Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that Iran would be punished for its “big mistake”, some Israeli officials said “severely”, and a looming all-out war in the region has taken international worries to the highest level.
Speculation over Israel’s potential targets focuses on Iran’s nuclear facilities, energy sector, and Iran’s military.
The first would likely cause a regional environmental disaster. “Would you support an attack on Iran’s nuclear sites by Israel?”, President Biden was asked by a reporter. “The answer is no,” he responded, adding that the US “will be discussing with the Israelis what they’re gonna do”.
The second would not be a strike only against Iran’s energy sector. It would also be a strike against the global oil market, and above all China, a major importer of Iran’s oil and gas. Judging by President Biden’s comments over the last few days, Washington is also trying to discard this option and suggesting that Israel should look at some other alternatives. Mr. Biden has said, “I don’t believe there’s going to be an all-out war. I think we can avoid it. But there’s a lot — a lot to do yet.”
Who can convince the Netanyahu government to strike back at Iran with “proportional retaliation”? The UN is dysfunctional. The Secretary-General of the UN has been declared persona non grata by Israel. The G7’s calls have become routine. The EU is invisible. However, in addition to Washington, Beijing and Moscow must also be in close communication with Israel regarding its military response to Iran, particularly after Mr. Biden’s statement. Beijing’s preference for silent diplomacy is well-known, but it could give Israel more than advice and urge Washington to temper Israeli retaliation.
In light of the above, the Israeli retaliation may target military installations, and senior officials perhaps of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, that hopefully would not trigger a full-blown war. Thus, the question now is whether Israel would wait to bring its operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon to a satisfactory point or strike Iran sooner rather than later to avoid continuing calls for restraint, and how “proportional” its retaliation would be. And when that happens, the question would become, “How would Iran retaliate?”
Whatever the Netanyahu government may opt for, the reality is that Israel can substantially degrade Hezbollah’s and Hamas’s capabilities for a good number of years but can eliminate neither. And, to a certain extent, and only to a certain extent, Washington might influence Mr. Netanyahu’s choice between triggering a major Middle East earthquake and a proportional retaliation to Iran, avoiding devastation, further loss of lives, and deepening regional enmities. Since October 7, Israel has challenged Iran’s regional outreach with some success, however, its international standing has suffered, even among its European supporters, as a result of Mr. Netanyahu’s endless political maneuvering, and the ferocity of IDF campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon. De-escalation has become the dictate of global logic.
Washington for a whole year has played the tune “ceasefire”. This was an unconvincing distraction and has not served Washington’s global political interests. During his recent trips to the region, Secretary Blinken constantly said that Israel had accepted America’s framework for a cease-fire and it was up to Hamas to take it. However, it is widely reported now that both sides kept adding new conditions to the ceasefire proposals.
On Friday, at a press briefing at the White House, President Biden was asked if Mr. Netanyahu could be trying to influence the US election and if that’s why he has not agreed to a diplomatic solution. This was his response: “ No administration has helped Israel more than I have. None. None. None. And I think Bibi should remember that. And whether he’s trying to influence the election, I don’t know, but I’m not counting on that.”[iv]
What prompted the question could be the impression that since October 7, 2023, it was Mr. Netanyahu in the driver’s seat of the US-Israeli relationship and not Mr. Biden. And, the latter’s success in convincing the former not to attack Iran’s nuclear sites should not be presented as a major diplomatic achievement.
In a nutshell, what happens over the next few days and weeks would not only prove yet another critical phase in Middle East history but also determine Mr. Netanyahu’s political future and shape the last chapter of President Biden’s legacy.
[i] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/02/biden-israel-iran-conflict-mideast/
[ii] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/10/04/iran-missile-israel-attack-video/
[iii] https://english.khamenei.ir/news/11146/Palestinian-and-Lebanese-Resistance-pushed-back-Zionist-regime
[iv] https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/10/04/press-briefing-by-president-biden-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-national-economic-adviser-lael-brainard/