Israelis Choose to Limit Attack on Iran … For Now

The long-anticipated Israeli attack on Iran commenced in the early hours of Saturday, Oct. 26. By 2:15 a.m., explosions were reported on the outskirts of Tehran, followed promptly by an Israel Defense Force statement confirming it had commenced air attacks on several Iranian targets.

Dozens of Israeli Air Force fighter jets, refueling planes, and reconnaissance craft traveled over 1,000 miles to carry out three waves of airstrikes over a four-hour window hitting roughly 20 targets across the Tehran, Karaj, Isfahan, and Shiraz areas. The IAF also took out radar and air defense systems in southwest and central Syria to ensure unhindered flight transit in carrying out the attack.

The first wave of strikes targeted anti-aircraft systems, including the S-300 Russian-made batteries protecting the capital city of Tehran, and caches of hundreds of missiles that eliminated Iran’s air defense and long-range radar capabilities from the start.

Having achieved air superiority, Israeli jets proceeded to take out drone manufacturing facilities and 12 factories that produced the multi-million-dollar solid fuel mixers that project ballistic missiles. A secret facility for nuclear research in Parchin was also reportedly attacked. By 6:00 a.m. the mission, dubbed “Operation Days of Repentance,” was over and all aircraft returned safely and intact to Israel. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps later stated that four Iranian soldiers had been killed.

The mission was in response to Iran’s ballistic missile assault on Oct. 1 and the persistent aggression from its terrorist proxies in Lebanon and Yemen. “The regime in Iran and its proxies in the region have been relentlessly attacking Israel since October 7 [2023] — on seven fronts — including direct attacks from Iranian soil,” the IDF said. “Like every other sovereign country in the world, the State of Israel has the right and duty to respond.”  

Iran was quick to downplay the attack, claiming that most of the Israeli jet’s missiles were intercepted. According to Iranian spokesman Fatemeh Mohajerani, “only limited damage has been done.”

As news of the attack broke at daylight on Saturday morning, analysts across the political spectrum were quick to comment on the surprisingly measured nature of the Israeli air strike. In recent weeks, Jerusalem and Tehran have sparred with belligerent threats and warnings over the catastrophic scope of attacks and repercussions.

That Israel only attacked military sites on Saturday morning stands in stark contrast to the previous two Iranian assaults on Israel from April 14 and Oct. 1 that indiscriminately targeted dense civilian population centers in addition to military bases and the nuclear facility in Dimona. Israel claimed to have informed Iran ahead of its Saturday attack through various diplomatic channels, including the Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldcamp, with a stern warning not to respond.

Criticism from Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s political opposition soon followed. The opposition leader Yair Lapid commented on social media: “The decision not to attack strategic and economic targets in Iran was wrong. We could have and should have exacted a much heavier price from Iran.” Former defense minister Avigdor Liberman also chimed in: “Unfortunately, it seems that instead of exacting a real price, the Israeli government is once again settling for showy actions and public relations.” 

Israel’s restraint from bombing nuclear and oil sites, however, came as a relief to Washington, as the Biden White House had pressured Netanyahu to leave Iranian nuclear and oil facilities off the table. According to Israeli officials, however, these sensitive sites were never primary targets to begin with. Although Jerusalem kept the White House in the loop before and during the attack, the strategic planning was never guided by Washington’s demands.  

Israel’s restraint also came as a relief to Arab neighbors, especially in the Gulf. Despite renewed Saudi-Iranian relations, Tehran has suspected the Gulf states of allowing Israel to use its airspace to carry out attacks against Iran and its proxies — claims that Saudi Arabia and its Gulf neighbors have denied.

Days before the Saturday morning attack, Iran warned that Saudi and UAE oil fields could be targeted by its terrorist proxies in Yemen and Iraq as a repercussion if Israel crippled Iranian oil production capabilities. The threat proved unnecessary but exposed Iran’s policy and intentions for the Sunni Arab states. 

The Saudi Foreign Ministry renounced Israel’s attack early on Saturday calling it a “serious violation of Iran’s territorial integrity and contradicts established international norms and laws.” This came a week following joint Russian, Omani, Iranian, and Saudi naval exercises in the northern Indian Ocean and a Saudi invitation to hold additional war games in the Red Sea. Saudi-Israel relations were on a promising path toward neutralization until Oct. 7, 2023, when Riyadh expressed its condemnation of Israel in the Hamas-initiated war in Gaza.

The low-impact nature of Israel’s Saturday attack, according to Jerusalem, was to deter the retaliation cycle from spiraling out of control. It was also meant to keep Iran from claiming major damage that might rouse further escalation.

Nonetheless, the airstrikes resulted in a significant tactical victory. With its air defense crippled, “Tehran, with all of its regime targets and sensitive infrastructure, might now be totally exposed to future Israeli strikes,” noted Jonathan Conricus, senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. The mission’s success exposed the weakness of Iran’s defense systems and presented Israel with the unprecedented opportunity to penetrate deep into enemy territory and inflict devastating results without high casualties or targeting sensitive nuclear or petroleum sites. 

The ball is now exactly where Israel placed it, in Iran’s court. The hope is that both sides will declare the episode over and avoid spiraling into further tit-for-tat retaliations. Tehran, however, has vowed to respond to any Israel attack with a “stronger response,” citing last Saturday morning’s sortie as “a violation of international law” and invoking Article 51 of the UN Charter as a legitimate right for retaliatory self-defense. 

Israeli Officials Communicate With White House

Israel braced for Iran’s response throughout the Sabbath morning. An hour after the IAF jets returned home, northern Israel came under a massive rocket barrage from Hezbollah — around 80 rockets — followed by barrages over the upper Galilee and Golan in the late afternoon, injuring roughly 25 and killing two Arab-Israelis in Majd al-Krum.

By nightfall, Israeli officials in Jerusalem communicated to their Washington counterparts that “we are not seeking an escalation that triggers prolonged conflict,” but that any Iranian response could incur a more complex and expansive attack than witnessed earlier that morning. 

Sunday morning broke with additional rocket salvos against Israel’s northern coastal cities of Nahariya and Acre and a truck ramming near an IDF base north of Tel Aviv, injuring 26 and killing one Israeli. Iran’s advantage is that its terrorist proxies, embedded in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon, can do the dirty work of retaliation without directly involving officials in Tehran or IRGC officers. Hezbollah in Lebanon, after all, was established by Tehran to be the defensive buffer and first responder should Israel attack Iranian soil.  

Israel’s persistent ground war in Gaza and southern Lebanon is not only to disarm immediate local threats but must also be understood in its wider context of weakening Iran’s regional hegemony. 

READ MORE from Bennett Tucker:

Israel Eliminates the ‘Butcher of Khan Younis’

Israel Fends Off Massive Iranian Missile Barrage

The post Israelis Choose to Limit Attack on Iran … For Now appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.