Key Takeaways:
– Israel Defense Forces (IDF) hit military targets in Iran in the final series of pre-dawn strikes, avoiding nuclear and oil facilities.
– Iran defended its inherent right to self-defense but emphasized its commitment to regional peace and stability.
– U.S. officials communicated to regional partners their hope that this exchange concludes the direct military conflict between Israel and Iran.
– Israel’s attacks were motivated by Iran’s continuous activities over several months.
– Iran downplayed the attack damage, potentially signalling the end of direct conflict. Experts maintain cautious optimism about shifting the conflict from military action to the diplomatic sphere.
Israeli Strikes Aimed at Deterrence
In retaliation to continuous attacks from Iran and its allies, the IDF launched a series of pre-dawn strikes on military targets. The IDF stated that the strikes targeted Iran’s aerial defense systems and missile manufacturing facilities, deliberately circumventing nuclear and oil facilities. The intention behind this action was to showcase Israel’s military prowess as a deterrent, while simultaneously aiming to avert a major escalation.
Responding to the strikes, Iran condemned the action, asserting its inherent right to defend itself. Despite this, Iran’s foreign ministry added that the country shall continue to uphold its responsibilities towards maintaining regional peace and stability. The country did not indicate any plans for imminent retaliation.
U.S. Hopes for End to Direct Military Conflict
A senior official from the Biden administration addressed reporters after the attacks. The official expressed U.S. hopes that this event would mark the end of the direct military exchange between Israel and Iran. This sentiment, the official argued, has been clearly communicated to all regional partners.
Yet, the response from other Middle Eastern nations was less than sympathetic. Both Qatar and Saudi Arabia criticized the invasion as a blatant violation of Iran’s sovereignty. Iraq accused Israel of pursuing its aggressive policies. Even Jordan, a close ally of the U.S., described the strikes as a dangerous escalation threatening regional stability.
Historical Context of The Conflict
For numerous decades, Iran and Israel have engaged in a covert war, primarily contested through discreet attacks or via Iran’s proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen, and forces in Syria and Iraq.
Tensions escalated in April when Israel bombed an Iranian consular compound in Damascus, killing commanders and advisers of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The following month, Iran retaliated with a drone and missile barrage on Israel, an unprecedented response at the time.
Moving Forward: A Cautious Optimism
Although Iran has previously pledged to retaliate to any form of Israeli aggression, some believe the limited nature of Israel’s recent attack could potentially mark the end of direct conflict. Experts suggest that, by downplaying the damage, Iran might be indicating its inclination to deem this round as settled and avoid further escalation.
Michael Milshtein, a scholar specializing in Palestinian studies, observed that Israel has already proven its air defenses are equipped to handle an attack. The presence of American troops also serves as a deterrence.
Yossi Mekelberg from Chatham House’s Middle East and North Africa Program shared this cautious optimism. He suggested that shifting the conflict from military to diplomatic and political avenues might be the next logical step. However, he added the critical caveat, “Whether Israel and Iran will think like this is a different matter.”