US Responds to Escalating Tensions Between Iran and Israel

Hours before Israel carried out a drone strike against Iran on Thursday night, Israeli officials informed their US counterparts in Washington about the impending attack. Without providing details, they indicated that the attack would happen in the next few days, as shared by a senior US official.

This news was not what the Biden administration wanted to hear. Leading up to this, US officials had been advising Israel against retaliating for Iran's recent attack, where numerous missiles and drones were launched from inside Iran towards Israel.

US officials were concerned that if Israel retaliated, it could lead to a dangerous cycle of back-and-forth attacks between the two countries, potentially getting out of hand.

A senior official clarified that the US did not approve of Israel's response, mentioning that they were informed beforehand about the strike on Thursday.

US officials are worried that the recent attacks have broken down the barrier between Israel and Iran, potentially leading to a more unpredictable and volatile direct confrontation. It is now important to see how Iran will react, as this will determine if the two countries are heading towards direct conflict or if they can find a way to avoid it.

It seems like the situation may be calming down. The US intelligence has believed for a while that Iran and Israel are not interested in a full-on war. Israel's recent retaliatory attack seems to have been planned to be small-scale, targeting just one military base far from Tehran. They purposely avoided hitting two nearby facilities that are crucial for Iran's nuclear program.

According to a regional intelligence source familiar with Iran's response to the attack, direct strikes between the two countries are no longer happening. The source mentioned that Iran is unlikely to retaliate.

A senior US official stated that there are currently no signs of further escalation, but cautioned that the situation could evolve. The official emphasized that all signs point to both sides de-escalating the conflict.

US officials are still conscious that predicting Iran's response to perceived provocations may be more challenging after the recent direct exchange of fire.

Last week, Iran launched a massive attack on Israel, firing directly from within its own borders for the first time. This unexpected move shattered long-held assumptions by the US and its allies about the extent of Iranian aggression and its readiness to directly target Israel.

Iranian officials have announced a shift in their approach towards Israel.

Hossein Salami, the top commander of Iran’s powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, stated on Iranian state TV that they have decided to establish a new rule. According to this new policy, if the Zionist regime attacks Iranian interests, assets, personalities, or citizens, Iran will retaliate from the Islamic Republic of Iran.

CIA Director Bill Burns said on Thursday at the George W. Bush Presidential Center in Dallas that he has rarely seen a more combustible moment in the Middle East than it is today.

Just hours before Israel's counterstrike on Thursday night, Iran's foreign minister warned on CNN that if Israel retaliated, Iran's response would be immediate and at a maximum level.

Iran's recent direct attack on Israel can be understood as a response to its inability to keep up in a long-standing shadow war. This ongoing conflict has resulted in the deaths of several Iranian commanders, according to former US officials who have insight into the Iranian regime.

Israel has conducted multiple successful attacks on Iranian military leaders in different parts of the region, including some officials within Iran itself. Recently, on April 1, an Israeli strike on a location in Syria, which Iran claims was an embassy, resulted in the death of seven officials, including two senior Iranian commanders.

Retired Gen. Frank McKenzie, who previously commanded US Central Command, highlighted the mounting pressure within the Iranian system. He pointed out, "Israel is targeting our people without facing any consequences? This is a major factor driving tensions."

McKenzie and other analysts believe that the attack in Syria on April 1 was seen by Iran as a worsening of an already difficult situation. Iranian leaders felt the need to respond strongly to prevent future Israeli actions.

Emergency and security personnel gather at the site of strikes which hit a building next to the Iranian embassy in Syria's capital Damascus, on April 1, 2024.

Emergency and security personnel gather at the site of strikes which hit a building next to the Iranian embassy in Syria's capital Damascus, on April 1, 2024.

Maher Al Mounes/AFP/Getty Images

One of the commanders killed, Mohammed Reza Zahedi, played a key role in connecting Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah, which is Iran's largest and most powerful proxy. According to Jonathan Panikoff, a former senior intelligence analyst specializing in the region, Zahedi's death was significant.

In the lead-up to Iran's missile and drone attack on Israel, US officials believed that Iran would respond through its network of proxy fighters, as it had done in the past. However, as Iran began moving missiles within its own territory, there was a shift in thinking across Washington about Iran's intentions, according to current and former American officials.

It is uncertain whether the recent shift in Iran's stance indicates a lasting change in the mindset of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, stated, "It is unclear whether, at 84 years old, Khamenei has altered his traditional strategic approach to avoid direct conflict with Israel, or if this is a glimpse into how a future Iranian government, possibly led by the military, may behave."

Perhaps the most relevant comparison to the current situation is the aftermath of the US strike that targeted top Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani in January 2020. In response, Iran, not one of its proxies, launched multiple short-range ballistic missiles at American troops stationed in a US military base in Iraq. This action was seen as a bold move that could potentially escalate tensions in the region.

During this incident, Iran made its intentions clear enough for US troops to seek shelter in bunkers, resulting in no American fatalities. However, many soldiers suffered from traumatic brain injuries. After the attack, Iran publicly stated that it considered the matter resolved. At that time, the US, led by then-President Donald Trump, decided against further retaliation.

Analyzing the actual consequences of Iran's attack

Some experts believed that Iran intentionally tried to minimize casualties to prevent further escalation after the attack on Israel. However, Pentagon officials strongly disagreed with this idea.

On Saturday, Israel and its allies successfully intercepted 99 percent of the Iranian projectiles before they could cause any significant damage. Fortunately, there were no casualties in Israel. The lack of impact, along with prior signals from Iran, has led to speculation in Washington about Iran's intentions.

Despite some suggesting that Iran may have held back during the attack, administration officials, including McKenzie and other former officials, have refuted this claim. The extensive scale of the assault indicates that Iran's goal was to harm Israelis, according to officials and analysts. This successful defense on Saturday was the result of years of military planning specifically tailored for such scenarios.

Air defense against a wide range of threats is a challenging task, according to current and former officials. Despite facing a complex operation, Israel and its allies managed to achieve success. However, this success was not guaranteed, as noted by the officials.

General McKenzie pointed out that the Iranians utilized their most advanced weapons, including ballistic missiles, drones, and land attack cruise missiles. Their attack was a significant and intense effort, rather than just a warning or signal.

Now, Washington and the region await Iran’s response to the Israeli counterstrike.

The risk, officials say, is profound.

Panikoff expressed concern about the increasing tension between Israel and Iran. He warned that as their threat perception of each other grows, the risk of escalation also increases. This dangerous dynamic could lead to more aggressive actions from both sides in future conflicts.

Editor's P/S:

The recent