What does Israel want to do after Iran’s drone and missile attacks? | Israel War in Gaza News

Israel is reportedly unable to agree on a response to a nighttime barrage of more than 300 Iranian drones and missiles launched in response to Israel’s attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus on April 1.

According to the Israeli army, 99 percent of the projectiles were intercepted by its jets and those of its allies, including the United States and Jordan. Others were stopped by Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system, acquired and operated with U.S. assistance.

While Western diplomats and U.S. President Joe Biden have told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu they will not support further retaliation, some analysts suggest last night’s attacks could be part of a broader strategy to draw in the U.S. , Israel’s close ally, for a broader regional strategy. war.

Laying the groundwork on April 1?

In determining how Israel might respond to the overnight attack, analysts focused on Israel’s own attack on the Iranian consulate on April 1.

That attack, which killed two generals and five officers of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was carried out with little regard for Israel’s allies, who were only notified shortly before the attack, according to at least one analyst Al Jazeera spoke to. .

Hamidreza Azizi, visiting researcher at SWP Berlin, outlined two scenarios, both based on the motivations behind the Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate.

In the first scenario, the Israeli attack occurred with little or no attention to the consequences. In the second, the attack was a deliberate attempt to draw Iran into a regional war and shift US and Western focus away from Israel’s war against Gaza and toward the regional bogeyman, Iran.

In both scenarios, US involvement would be critical.

Despite its status as a regional superpower, Israel – burdened by six months of war in Gaza – would have little chance against Iran’s standing army of at least 580,000 men, complemented by around 200,000 trained reserve troops divided between the army. and the IRGC.

“Netanyahu’s plan is clear: divert attention from the war in Gaza and drag the US and other Western allies back into the Middle East,” said Nomi Bar-Yaacov, associate fellow at Chatham House.

“Given the close relationship between Israel and the US and Israel’s dependence on US aid, Israel should have informed the US that it was planning to attack the Iranian consulate building where the IRGC is based.

“By failing to do so, Israel has crossed a red line. Israel’s motives…need to be questioned. An attack on a foreign consulate constitutes an attack on foreign soil under international law, and it is clear that Netanyahu knew he was crossing the line and that Iran would respond with force,” she said.

For years, Iran has maintained constant pressure on Israel through its proxies, notably Hezbollah in Lebanon, which has maintained an exchange of fire with Israel since before October 7th.

Eye on the prize

Netanyahu’s motivations for trying to involve the US in the war likely run deeper than just Israel’s interests, analysts say, and likely speak to concerns closer to his heart.

Polls in Israel show that the prime minister’s popularity is at a critical level. After Netanyahu built his reputation on claims that only he and his Likud party stood between the Israelis and oblivion, the surprise attack by Hamas-led fighters on October 7 severely damaged his position.

“Israel’s options are most impacted by how Netanyahu, who is in dire straits nationally and internationally, will choose to take advantage of Western sympathy for Tel Aviv following Iran’s highly telegraphed attack,” said HA Hellyer, a security official at Middle East. Oriente at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Royal United Services Institute.

In the months leading up to October, popular discontent with Netanyahu grew after his far-right government tried to force changes that would undermine Israel’s independent judiciary.

In the months since October 7, protests have grown against his handling of the war in Gaza, as he is seen as having little interest in securing the release of the remaining prisoners taken from Israel in the attack.

The protests, in addition to increasing, turned into demonstrations against him and his government.

Even the US appeared to have lost patience with Netanyahu, with a highly publicized invitation issued to Benny Gantz, a member of Israel’s war cabinet, to visit Washington, DC for talks.

Netanyahu has worked to regain lost ground, taking every opportunity to position himself at the forefront of a wave of nationalism that makes many people in Israel reluctant to call for an end to the war.

‘A turning point’

However, regardless of how Israel chooses to portray itself in this latest confrontation, it is the US that is staging the play.

“What we have heard so far is that the US has no interest in a war and is signaling that there will be a unified Western diplomatic response to Iran, while also calling for containment,” Azizi said.

With the US signaling, Netanyahu’s strategy appears to be in danger.

“We are at an inflection point and the only solution is diplomatic,” said Bar-Yaacov. “A harsh military response risks dragging the region into more turmoil.”

Diplomatically, Israel’s response to the attack mirrored its reaction to the previous one, with its ambassador to the United Nations calling for a UN Security Council meeting on the matter, attempting once again to rally international opinion behind Israel, despite this latest attack. being a response to that of Israel.

Furthermore, with Iran appearing less likely to suffer any costs for its attack on Israel, it risks widening divisions both within its own cabinet and in Israeli society if no action is taken.

“If [Netanyahu] thinks DC will reject supporting an attack on Iran itself, so attacks on dozens of proxies simultaneously could be an alternative option,” Hellyer said.