After weeks of brinkmanship and uncertainty, Israel has crossed the Rubicon and launched a massive attack on a host of strategic targets in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Code-named Operation Rising Lion, this is the most dramatic, extensive and scaled-up Israeli offensive against a state, at least since the June War of 1967.
The two states have been at loggerheads since the founding of the Islamic Republic in 1979, but Israel’s attacks are a definite escalation. Tehran’s theological approach to Israel meant that a modicum of ties was impossible, even unimaginable. Over the decades, Iran has propped up regional proxies to ensure a severe but cost-effective military option vis-à-vis Israel. Iran created, co-opted or emboldened several non-state players committed to Israel’s defeat. Thus, Hamas in Palestine, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and the Popular Mobilisation Forces in Iraq have been Iran’s principal instruments in furthering its interests.
The proxy approach is not only cost-effective but also offers a strong element of deniability. Thus, when benefiting from the actions of these groups in tying down Israel and its military capabilities, Iran avoided any direct military reprisal from Israel. Through this proxy war, Iran has successfully expanded its influence beyond its territorial limits, and its sphere of influence can be felt not only in the immediate vicinity of the Persian Gulf but also in the Mediterranean Sea, the Red Sea, and the northern shores of the Arabian Sea.
For a long time, Israel has been in a strategic dilemma. Military responses to the proxies, which it carries out at regular intervals, only provide temporary relief until the next cycle of violence. Despite the prolonged ground and air offensive and massive displacement of the Palestinians — indifferent to international disapproval and criticisms — Israel has not been able to “defeat” Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Its military operations have weakened the groups and eliminated some of the known figures. But Hamas appears to be very much alive in the Gaza Strip, and the same can be said, albeit at a limited scale, for Hezbollah in Lebanon. The destruction of several infrastructure facilities, including the Sanaa airport, has not forced the Houthis to seek a truce. While Hamas has a base independent of Iran, the others — including the PMF in Iraq — depend heavily on Iran. Reining in these groups — especially against Israel — does not serve larger Iranian interests.
Running out of patience, Israel now seeks to minimise the long-term potential of these militant groups by targeting the source of their political legitimacy, support and arsenal. The Tehran-centric Axis of Resistance, according to Israel, cannot be defeated without directly confronting Iran. Earlier rounds of direct confrontation between Iran and Israel, in April and October 2024, did not significantly alter the equation. While both countries claimed “victory”, the confrontation also exposed the tacit regional support for Israel.
Ironic as it sounds, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei should be credited as the progenitor of the Abraham Accords between Israel and some Arab countries. Perceived threats from Tehran compelled Gulf Arab countries — tacitly supported by Saudi Arabia — to bury their erstwhile antagonism towards Israel, even sidestep the Palestinian question and normalise relations with the Jewish state. While US President Donald Trump got all the accolades and publicity, it was the belligerence from Tehran that propelled the Sunni Arab countries to move closer to Israel. These agreements endured even the 20-month-old Gaza crisis following the October 7 terror attacks.
According to the Israeli military spokesperson, in the early hours of Friday, with 300 different types of ammunition, 200 aircraft struck 100 targets in different parts of Iran. These include several military and missile bases, as well as nuclear installations, including the Natanz nuclear facility and the headquarters of senior military officials. There are also indications that some of these strikes were land-based and were carried out from within Iran.
Israeli officials describe the military strike as an “existential” battle “to degrade, to disrupt and to remove” the nuclear threat from Iran.
In the past, Israel had carried out such a successful strike at the Osirak nuclear reactor outside Baghdad — incidentally on June 7, 1981 — to scuttle the nuclear ambitions of Iraq. Similar surgical strikes were carried out in the Deir ez-Zor region in Syria in September 2007. Iran is a different story. The element of surprise, critical for any military operation, is absent as the international community has been discussing and speculating about an impending Israeli military strike against Iranian nuclear assets for decades. Anticipating such an eventuality, Iran has fortified its nuclear facilities.
The Israeli offensive comes amidst two closely linked developments: One, Oman has been hosting negotiations between Iran and the US towards reviving the 2015 nuclear deal, from which the earlier Trump administration had walked out. Second, in recent days, the International Atomic Energy Agency has expressed displeasure over Iran’s non-compliance with its commitments to non-proliferation. The Israeli action scuttles any immediate political settlement to the Iran quagmire.
Initial reports indicate that Iran has replaced some of the senior military officials who were killed in the Israeli operations. Within hours, Iran responded by launching a wave of drones against Israel. Some of them were reportedly intercepted and destroyed over Jordan, whose territories they violated. In April last year, a host of Western and regional powers were involved in shooting down several aerial projectiles fired by Iranian proxies in Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. Will the same happen this time?
Rather than targeting the proxies, this time Israel decided to target the patron. As an Israeli official declared, it is not an operation but a war. In the absence of any international power willing and capable of mediating, the military confrontation will likely continue and intensify. So far, Israel has established that it is capable, willing and prepared to act alone in defence of its critical national interests. The intelligence establishment, which failed miserably on October 7, has managed to deliver some critical results against Iran.
Amidst the escalating conflict, the people of Iran and Israel will rally around the flag and seek a definite “victory” for themselves. It is easier said than done. For centuries, conflicts have had one golden rule: You know how to start a war, but not how it will end. The current confrontation will not be an exception to this maxim.
The writer teaches contemporary Middle East at Jawaharlal Nehru University
