Was Israel’s tempered response to Iran prelude to something bigger?

by Jonathan Sweet and Mark Toth, opinion contributors

If you were disappointed with the limited Israeli response to the Iranian missile attack in April, then you were likely disappointed with the Israeli military’s attack on Friday.

Israel again resorted to strategic messaging. Granted, the response was on an unprecedented scale — over 100 aircraft were used in the attack, including F-35 stealth fighters, traveling approximately 2,000 kilometers in three waves, striking more than 20 targets. Yet many expected more.

Israeli targets included Iran’s air-defense network and associated radars, military bases, drone facilities and solid-fuel manufacturing plants for ballistic missiles. As the intelligence community assesses the battle damage from the strikes, one thing is certain: Iran’s air-defense network had zero effect.

Early-warning radar sites along the Iranian border, as well as in Syria and Iraq, together with S-300/400 air-defense systems protecting military bases throughout Iran, were destroyed — providing air avenues of approach for follow-on attacks.

Missing were strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, oil production facilities, critical infrastructure and the Iranian leadership. The Biden administration leaned hard on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to strike these targets. When asked if he would support a decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, the president responded, “the answer is no.”

On Oct. 13, a communiqué signed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin threatened to pause the delivery of U.S. weapons and aid to Israel unless the Jewish State provided “assurance that humanitarian aid is flowing into Gaza unhindered.”

We saw the results on Oct. 26. Another demonstration of Israeli capability with the option to exploit vulnerabilities later — after the American election on Nov. 5.

President Biden told reporters that Israel gave him a heads-up prior to the airstrike and said it looked like “they didn’t hit anything but military targets.” No kidding. His administration pressured Israel not to strike nuclear facilities or oil installations.

“I hope this is the end,” Biden said. That’s wishful thinking on behalf of this century’s Neville Chamberlain.

Defense and escalation are this administration’s talking points for “do nothing.” They again resurfaced in statements from the Department of Defense and Vice President Kamala Harris over the weekend.

A senior U.S. official described Israel’s strikes as “extensive” and “precise.” The official emphasized that the U.S. did not take part in the strikes. Rather, the White House worked with the Israeli government to encourage a “low-risk attack with no civilian harm.” The official added that, “The effect was a proportionate self-defense response. The effect is to deter future attacks and to degrade Iran’s abilities to launch future attacks” and that the U.S. considered the operation to be an “end to the exchange of fire between Israel and Iran.”

Harris called for “de-escalation and not an escalation of activities in that region.” Mustering more word salad, she told reporters, “I feel very strongly, we as the U.S. feel very strongly that Iran must stop what it is doing in terms of the threat that it presents to the region, and we will always defend Israel against any attacks by Iran in that way.”

The tit-for-tat retaliation cycle will likely continue in the Middle East. Iranian leadership appears intent on responding.

Hossein Salami, the commander-in-chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, warned of “severe consequences for Israel,” and promised “bitter consequences for the occupiers.” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei claimed Tehran will “use all available tools” to respond to Israel’s weekend attack on military targets in Iran.

The Tasnim news agency reported that “Iran reserves the right to respond to any aggression, and there is no doubt that Israel will face a proportional reaction.” While Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Tehran was not looking for a war, he said Iran would respond “appropriately” to Israel’s strike, adding that “we will give an appropriate response to the aggression of the Zionist regime.”

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran’s power should be demonstrated to Israel: “It is up to the authorities to determine how to convey the power and will of the Iranian people to the Israeli regime and to take actions that serve the interests of this nation and country.” And Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran has “no limits” in defending its interests. His ministry said it “considers itself entitled and obligated to defend against foreign acts of aggression,” adding it has a responsibility to defend itself.

Strategic messaging via a one-and-done response will not end the conflict. Israel needs a sustained air campaign to set conditions for the defeat of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Otherwise, this becomes another “forever war” established on the Biden watch.

Left unchecked, Iran will simply find a new proxy to continue its war against Israel. Short of the nuclear arsenal the regime is striving to obtain, Iran presently is a one-trick military pony — ballistic missiles.

Israel’s nightmare ends when the Islamic Republic of Iran is defeated, not through some sort of de-escalation fairy tale the White House is attempting to conjure. U.S.-supplied THAAD interceptor systems will not deter Iran, nor will more hollow “do not respond” election campaign soundbites by the vice president.

The White House’s “don’t” red line does not brief well because Iran simply does not believe the U.S. — under Biden or Harris — will back it up. There are no consequences, beyond sanctions — only additional defensive weapons. The Biden administration simply refuses to support any offensive action against Iran.

Jerusalem is beyond “once upon a time.” Iran has been very clear on its end goal — contrary to Harris’s statement, it is not going to stop what it is doing.

Friday’s airstrikes were likely just a beginning. Israel is setting conditions for that possibility by isolating the Revolutionary Guard Corps and Iran’s mullahs from the Iranian Army and the Iranian people. The first step was to defeat Iran’s integrated air-defense network.

Israel is one step closer to removing the head from the Iranian hydra.

In the shadows, Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi — the son of the last Shah of Iran — is prepared to lead a transitional Iranian government after a 45-year absence. While not a perfect course of action, it is better than the current alternative.

That outcome could soon be accelerated. Khamenei, age 85, is reportedly seriously ill. His second-oldest son, Mojtaba Khamenei, will likely succeed him when he passes, though the Revolutionary Guard Corps would have a say in the ayatollah’s successor.

Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Sweet served 30 years as an Army intelligence officer. Mark Toth writes on national security and foreign policy.