Three ways Israel could respond to Iran Analysis by Foreign Policy

The Foreign Policy magazine has published an article arguing that Israeli leaders have vowed to counterattack, but how they do so could jeopardize international support. Caliber.Az reprints the article.

Even though Israel and its partners say they downed more than 99 per cent of the hundreds of drones and missiles that Iran fired at it over the weekend in a major moment of escalation in the Middle East, Israeli leaders say they have no choice but to respond. 

That was the message that Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant reportedly conveyed to U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, even as top Biden administration officials—including the president himself—urged Israel to be careful with its response. Biden also told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the United States would not participate in or support a direct Israeli strike on Iran. 

In light of that pressure, Israel has a choice to make. Does it go with a high-risk strike on Iranian soil, perhaps against its nuclear program or another high-value target? Or does it try to lower the risk of regional war with a more tailored approach, such as a cyberattack against Tehran, targeted strikes against Iranian commanders outside of Iran, or an attack on Iran-backed proxy groups in the region? 

But even as Netanyahu’s war cabinet calls for a rapid response, experts are urging the Israelis not to rush into the decision.

“There’s the people who are playing chess, the people who are playing checkers, and the people who are eating the pieces off the board,” said Jonathan Lord, a former U.S. defence official and congressional aide who is now the director of the Middle East security program at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), a Washington-based think tank. “Israel likely has to respond, but there is no impetus to respond immediately. They don’t need to rush.”

Option 1: Attack Iran’s Nuclear Program 

Iran’s nuclear program has accelerated since the United States pulled out of the nuclear deal nearly six years ago. It’s not clear that Iran has started building nuclear-capable missiles again, but if it did decide to build a nuclear weapon, Tehran might be able to field one in as quickly as a few months, top U.S. officials indicated last year. That makes Iranian nuclear facilities an attractive target for the Israelis—though one on the high end of the escalation spectrum.

“If Israel does respond to Iran, it could be as significant as striking suspected Iranian nuclear weapons facilities or going after their defence industrial base,” said Michael Mulroy, a former U.S. defence official. “If they do either or both successfully, Iran will [have made] a strategic mistake in mounting this attack.”

That’s a big if. One of Iran’s biggest nuclear facilities—Natanz—is dug into the side of a mountain in the Zagros range so deep in the ground that might be impenetrable to even the largest U.S.-made bunker-busting bomb.

“You could miss,” Lord said. “You could fail. The only thing worse than Iran being where it potentially is with its nuclear program is if Israel took a shot to take it out and it didn’t succeed.”

A direct attack on Iran’s nuclear program would probably mean the end of the ad hoc coalition of Arab states that supported the Israeli missile defence effort against Iran this weekend. It might also further draw Iranian proxies, such as Lebanon-based Hezbollah, into even fiercer direct confrontation with Israel, experts said. And with the United States already signalling that it won’t support a direct attack on Iran, the Israelis have to be careful not to go too far to anger their biggest weapons patron—during an election year for Biden, no less. 

“You already are seeing some tensions and some daylight between the Americans and the Israelis,” said Bilal Saab, an associate fellow with Chatham House in London and former U.S. defence official. “So the last thing you want to do right now is lose the Americans at a very critical and dangerous time.”

Option 2: Target Iranian Commanders, Military, or Sites Inside or Outside Iran

Israel could strike targets on Iranian soil that are not directly associated with the country’s nuclear program. For instance, it could target a high-value military leader such as Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) aerospace forces, who masterminded this weekend’s drone and missile attack.

“You will then be going after the guy who orchestrated this massive fireworks show,” Lord said. “He’s always on their minds as a target.”

Israel could also go after military sites or weapons depots inside the country, or even IRGC headquarters. 

“They will likely choose to respond directly in Iran, although it is likely that the U.S. will try to dissuade that action to contain and prevent this from expanding,” said Mulroy, the former U.S. defence official. 

However, it might whet Israel’s appetite enough to respond with a stepped-up assassination campaign against IRGC commanders who are outside of Iran, in countries such as Iraq and Syria. It may even pursue something similar to the strike against an Iranian consular facility in Syria on April 1 that killed Gen. Mohammad Reza Zahedi, the IRGC Quds Force commander in Lebanon and Syria, as well as his deputy and five other officers—the same attack that began the current escalatory spiral between Israel and Iran.

However, as this weekend’s retaliatory attacks—as well as the Iranian ballistic missile strikes against Iraqi military bases housing U.S. troops in January 2020, launched in response to the U.S. killing of then-IRGC leader Qassem Suleimani—shows that there is notable escalation risk in Israel going after Iranian military leaders, whether inside or outside Iran proper. 

But killing a high-value target might also allow Israel to bide its time, Lord said, perhaps for weeks or months. And although Netanyahu might not have the support of the Biden administration for such an attack, it could be enough to send a deterrent signal to Iran without tipping over the apple cart with Washington.

“The IDF [Israel Defense Forces] likes a victory, but the IDF doesn’t like a defensive victory,” said Frank McKenzie, a retired U.S. Marine general who led U.S. Central Command from 2019 until 2022, during an event put on by the Jewish Institute for National Security of America on Monday.

Still, there’s a risk of operational failure in attacking a leader such as Hajizadeh or an IRGC facility. It might have to take place at night—and after this weekend’s attacks, many Iranian military leaders are probably in hiding. 

“Iran, right now, is at a high level of alert,” McKenzie added. “Leaders will be in bunkers.”

And the pressure from the Americans and other countries to play it cool also might dissuade a quick response. 

“The fact that we were so proactive and quick in going through the United Nations Security Council, the fact that [Biden] placed a phone call immediately with the Israeli prime minister to tell him that we do not support retaliation—those two factors should reduce the chances of a more aggressive Israeli strike against Iran right now,” Saab said.

Option 3: Strike Iranian Proxies or Launch a Cyberattack on Iran

If Israeli leaders are concerned about escalating tensions with Iran, they might choose a lower-end response: Targeting Iranian proxies in the Middle East or engaging in cyberattacks against Iran—and trying to show that they’re the big man on campus in the region in the process. 

Another humiliation in the region—after barely any Iranian drones or missiles succeeded in hitting Israeli soil over the weekend—could cause another hit to Tehran’s international credibility. 

“You’ve just really embarrassed these guys infinitely. Israel is stronger today. Iran is weaker,” McKenzie said. “If you’ve got to do something, whatever I did would be something that was designed to further heighten your technological superiority over Iran. Choose something that is embarrassing.”

Hezbollah is Iran’s closest and most important proxy group in the region. Israel has already been carrying out tit-for-tat strikes against the militant group in Lebanon over the past six months, but it could choose to launch a much more intensive military campaign against Hezbollah. 

However, that carries risks of its own for Israel. Since the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, Hezbollah has tried to avoid being drawn into a full-blown war with Israel, but as Daniel Byman writes for Foreign Policy, “Should Hezbollah decide to engage in all-out war, it would be a dramatic escalation: Hezbollah’s 100,000-plus rocket arsenal dwarfs that of Hamas, and its fighters are well-trained and battle-hardened.” The group would no doubt suffer major losses, but so too could Israel. 

Still, after the Iranians took a historic step by striking Israel directly from their soil—something that Tehran has never done before—Netanyahu may be facing considerable pressure from hard-liners in his war cabinet for a stronger response. 

“If you do that right now and it is deemed to be insufficient, that could be perceived as weakness,” said Lord, the CNAS expert.

Iran’s Response

Iran expended a lot of weapons in Saturday night’s attacks against Israel. It fired more than 100 medium-range ballistic missiles, more than 30 land-attack cruise missiles, and more than 150 one-way attack drones toward Israel, according to a senior U.S. military official. 

And McKenzie, the former U.S. Central Command chief, said that Iran had to bring those missiles—special variants with enough range to attack Israel—out of storage, depleting a good chunk of its arsenal for a possible regional war. 

“This was maximum effort,” McKenzie added. “They expended the vast majority of their ballistic missiles used to attack Israel.”

But a key challenge for Iran in responding to the Israelis with firepower of its own is its lack of missile launchers. McKenzie said that the Iranians have only about 300 missile launchers to do these kinds of attacks, creating a major bottleneck if Tehran ever wants to conduct a significant salvo across the region. 

Israel also has the benefit of being far away—its borders are more than 1,100 miles away from some of the missile launch points used by Iran this weekend. “There isn’t an imminent threat of Iran going back and doing this again on Wednesday,” Lord said.

The Iranians, however, might have plenty of ability to snuff out an Israeli attack in the form of high-tech Russian-made air and missile defences. “They’re in no way going to compete with fifth-generation fighter aircraft from the Israelis,” said Saab, the Chatham House fellow. “But the air defence system that they have is no joke. It’s not the Syrian air defence network.”

But on both sides, the fear of the worst case scenario is likely leading leaders to pull their punches. 

“What did the Iranians think would happen if they’d killed 500 Israelis, and [blew up] F-35s, and maybe hit a synagogue?” McKenzie said. “I know what the Israeli response would have been. And they had to believe that, too.”