In consequence to the Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus on 1 April, in which crucial Iranian officers, including General Zahedi, were killed, the promised retaliation was expected. The Iranian authorities considered that they had the right to do so in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
The retaliatory attack began on 13 April with about 300 missiles, including 170 drones, 110 ballistic missiles and 30 maneuvering missiles.
According to Israeli statements, as many as 99 percent of these missiles were captured and destroyed in the air before reaching their targets. It would seem, then, that the Iranian attack was a failure and only confirmed the large capabilities of Israeli air defense.
However, this event needs to be tackled in a broader context of regional conflict and many fresh aspects that have not yet arisen, and which may point to fundamental qualitative changes for the arrangement of forces.
The most crucial of them seems to have been Iran's first direct attack on Israel. To date, this has not happened, and these countries, Israel and Iran, have most frequently confronted each another through alternate participants, organisations specified as Hezbollah or Hamas, and there has been no direct exchange of punches.
Now that has changed and Iran has hit Israel. individual might say that doesn't mean much, due to the fact that Iranian rockets have been knocked down in the vast majority. This is not the case, as preliminary assessments confirmed by the American ABC News agency have already shown, 9 Iranian ballistic missiles have achieved their targets by hitting Israeli airbases in Sinai: Nevatim and Ramon. They were designed to harm 1 C-130 transport aircraft and the infrastructure elements of these bases.
Another sign of a crucial change is that for the first time in Israel's history, the attack on this country was repulsed with the crucial participation of 3rd countries, namely the USA, Britain, Jordan and France. Especially crucial was the U.S. participation, whose air and naval forces, according to authoritative statements, dropped 80 drones and at least 6 ballistic missiles utilizing the Aegis system.
So far, Israel, since its beginning in 1948, at least officially, has managed to guarantee safety by utilizing only external support for arms and ammunition supplies. For decades, this ability to defend itself by all enemies has been the subject of peculiar pride for Israel.
Now this self-sufficiency of Israel in the safety sphere seems to be over, and it seems that Israel is becoming straight dependent on the U.S. armed forces' actions, and thus has lost its actual independency in terms of planning and carrying out armed operations independently. It is already said that Netanyahu was to quit the escalation consequence to Iran's attack after talking to Biden.
The next, bad forecast for Israel, will be a change in the perception of Western countries in the mediate East. To date, it has been officially stated that the intent of the Western armed forces stationed there is to combat ISIS terrorism and to guarantee stableness and safety in the region. It now appears that the forces of the United States and large Britain are mainly there to defend Israel militarily.
Among local regimes this seems to be accepted most likely only in Jordan, whose authoritarian ruler already has more and more problems with maintaining power in his country, where a very large proportion of the population are Palestinians and it is apparent that they do not like the king, whose aviation, including his own daughter, being a fighter pilot, defends the judaic state at a time erstwhile the people of Gaza are experiencing attacks from Israel.
Another element, which has a crucial impact on the situation throughout the region, is that Iran, through its direct confrontation with Israel, has become credible as an authentic defender of Palestinians and believing Muslims who, after all, are deprived of access to their holy places in Jerusalem by Israel.
So far, the crucial Muslim countries of the region have only verbally condemned Israel, and now Iran has pierced everyone, due to the fact that it has carried out armed action, has set Israel red lines and has shown that its consequence is inevitable and cannot be intimidated, not only by Israel, but even by the US.
This paradoxically, over the longer term, may have a affirmative impact on the political developments in the region, due to the fact that if Israel sees that a serious player has appeared, it will yet begin to measure its position and capabilities in real terms, and adapt accordingly to a fresh situation which cannot be further controlled by military means.
Iran, moving from "strategic patience" to active deterrence, today, for Israel, changed the hazard calculation parameters in taking military action in the mediate East.
The last, though not least, origin affecting the rules of the game is the calculation of financial costs. It turned out what was portrayed on Ynet's website by erstwhile financial advisor to the chief of staff of the Israeli army, General Reem Aminoach, that Israel had spent a sum of 4–5 billion shekels in defence of the Iranian attack, or up to $1.3 billion.
However, the cost on the Iranian side was to be even 10 times lower, as it used, with any exceptions, the cheapest, simplest and rather outdated drones and rockets.
It should be noted that the full Israeli military budget late amounted to $23.4 billion, meaning an crucial part of it was virtually fired in those fewer hours of defence against 2 waves of Iranian missiles.
This shows that, with specified parameters, Israel is incapable to go to a long-term war with Iran, all the more so that the operation in Gaza has severely undermined the country's capabilities. According to this Israeli portal Ynet, only the first 3 months of the military operation in Gaza cost 217 billion shekels ($54 billion), and no of the targets were met.
In assessing all this together, it is highly likely that Israel will not further escalate the conflict with Iran and will not effort an open attack on the country, especially as both the US and the European patrons of Israel have already announced a refusal to support offensive Israeli actions. Without this, it is doubtful that Israel itself would be able to attack Iran's territory.
A certain deterrent action may besides be given by the Iranian authorities that if Israel had made a mistake again, it would have a more decisive response, utilizing a weapon they had not utilized before. No 1 is rather certain what the weapon would be, but it can be assumed that it could be hypersonic missiles that Iran's possession has already boasted about, or even atomic weapons, as Iran is on the verge of obtaining it.
Stanisław Lewicki
