Western and regional support is aimed at preventing a war, not giving Netanyahu the confidence to start one
April 15, 2024 4:17 pm(Updated 4:29 pm)
On the face of it, Iran’s aerial bombardment on Saturday night was a failure. Israel’s defence systems stood strong, protecting the skies above Jerusalem and preventing 99 per cent of drones and missiles from hitting their intended targets.
But it would be a mistake to take too much comfort: without the military and intelligence assistance of the US, UK and France, it could have been a very different outcome.
Imagine, for a moment, that some of those drones had struck their targets. Imagine if there had been more civilian casualties than the one young girl who was badly injured by falling shrapnel.
We would almost certainly be in the opening days of an all-out war between Israel and Iran. Unthinkable, except it’s not.
The support from Arab countries in repelling Saturday’s attack was also significant. Jordan closed its airspace to commercial flights to allow US and Israeli jets to operate, while Amman’s own air force intercepted a number of Iranian drones.
Saudi Arabia and some of the Gulf states, which host US missile defence systems and support aircraft, also played an indirect but important role.
This co-operation shouldn’t be underestimated. But nor should it be taken for granted, and those same countries – which have excoriated Israel over the war in Gaza, but came to its defence in its hour of need – are now urging Benjamin Netanyahu to remain calm and not take any action that might escalate the situation.
The Israeli prime minister, who pointedly ignored President Joe Biden’s advice not to be “consumed by rage” after 7 October, might be more inclined to listen this time.
Biden has reportedly told Netanyahu that the US will not join in any counter-strikes on Iran, while UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron has urged Israel to act with “head as well as heart” and not escalate tensions.
On Saturday, Washington and London showed loyalty when it mattered, but neither government wants to be dragged into a wider conflict. Their support is intended to prevent a war, not give Netanyahu the confidence to start one.
After the Hamas attacks, the US positioned an aircraft carrier group in the eastern Mediterranean to dissuade Iran and its proxies from opening new fronts. It did the trick, but when the US removed it some months later, the Israelis were taken aback.
“We’re not going to abandon them, but this is a timely reminder that we’re not here for whatever they want to do,” was the explanation a US diplomat gave me.
That should guide Israel’s decision makers as they mull over a possible response.
Should there be one at all? It’s common for Israeli officials to respond to criticism of their country’s military actions by asking: what would you do if you came under attack? (Israeli president Isaac Herzog repeated this argument during an interview with me on Sky News on Sunday.)
It is a fair question – but one that could equally apply after Israel’s strike on Iran’s diplomatic compound in Damascus earlier this month.
Flip it around: had Iran flattened a building connected to an Israeli embassy, and killed seven military officers including a senior general, would Israel have sat on its hands? Never. (Nor, as Lord Cameron confirmed on Monday, would the UK: “We would take very strong action,” he said in a broadcast interview.)
This is why President Biden has told Netanyahu to “take the win” following Iran’s foiled drone attack. The strike in Damascus might have eliminated a man considered a threat to Israel, but it took Washington by surprise and sparked the events we’re now living through.
If Israel does decide to retaliate, it has options. A direct strike on Iran would be the like-for-like response, but also the most provocative. Increasing attacks on Hezbollah in southern Lebanon would be less risky and would have the benefit of pushing the militant group back from Israel’s border.
Another possibility, and one probably more acceptable to allies, would be the covert and deniable assassination of a senior Iranian official some point in the coming weeks or months. Israel has demonstrated its ability to do that in the past, and it would be a more purposeful way of enacting revenge than cosmetic air strikes on an Iranian military base.
But it’s not simply a question of what Israel wants to do, but what can it realistically do?
With a war still being fought in Gaza, a hostage crisis to resolve and daily exchanges of fire on its northern borders, does Israel have the ability to fight on multiple fronts and against a highly sophisticated foe? Six months of war have taken their toll on the IDF and exhausted some of its capacity.
“He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight,” said the ancient Chinese general Sun Tzu in his military treatise The Art of War.
Despite his sabre-rattling, Netanyahu has a habit of putting off tough decisions for political purposes.
But taking no immediate action in response to Saturday’s assault has the advantage of keeping Tehran guessing – don’t underestimate the power of silence.
Alistair Bunkall is Sky News’ Middle East correspondent