On April 13, 2024, Islamic regime in Iran executed a notable offensive, deploying more than 300 drones and missiles in an attack against Israel. The action was purportedly in response to an aerial assault on its consulate in Syria on April 1, 2024. The assault included 170 drones, 30 cruise missiles, and at least 110 ballistic missiles.

 

US and Israeli sources reported that approximately 99% of the incoming attack was intercepted, either outside Israeli airspace, within Jordanian and Iraqi territories, or within Israel itself. The interception of these drones and missiles was facilitated through collaboration with the US, UK, France, and Jordan. Additionally, Israel's well-contextualised three-layered missile defence systems successfully intercepted several ballistic missiles.

 

In response to the aforementioned attack, Israel launched a retaliatory strike against Iran on April 19, 2024. The strike primarily targeted the 8th Tactical Air Bases (TAB) located in the central Iranian city of Esfahan. This airbase is notable for housing Iran's US-made F-14 Tomcats and Russian Sukhoi 35 fighter jets, in addition to serving as a crucial defence shield for the Natanz nuclear site.

 

At present, it has been confirmed that the retaliatory assault utilised small quadcopter drones, suspected to have been operated from within Iranian territory. However, details regarding additional weapons employed in the attack, such as cruise missiles or F-35 stealth fighter jets, have not yet been disclosed.

 

Similar to the Iranian attack on Israel, the Israeli retaliatory strike also resulted in minimal damage to TAB-8. However, Israeli sources have asserted that during the assault, a radar component utilised by the S-300 missile system was purportedly destroyed.

 

However, despite efforts from both sides to downplay the significance of the attacks and project strength through retaliatory measures, it is evident that Israel has faced notable setbacks. The strategic move undertaken by Netanyahu government has backfired considerably, leaving the state of Israel in a vulnerable position unprecedented in its relatively short 75-year history.

 

 

Israel's Backfiring Gambit

The recent series of reciprocal military operations, which have been dismissively described as mere 'fireworks displays,' between the Islamic Regime in Iran and Israel, commenced on April 1, 2024. This escalation was triggered by an Israeli airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, resulting in the deaths of several members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), including Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi and his deputy, General Mohammad Hadi Hajriahimi, both senior figures in the IRGC's Quds Force.

 

The airstrike appears to have been calculated to provoke Tehran into a direct military confrontation, thereby serving multiple strategic purposes for Israel. Initially, prior to the attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's administration faced notable international censure after a military operation in the Gaza Strip starting on October 7, 2023, resulted in over 30,000 Palestinian civilian casualties, including 14,000 children. This action elicited widespread global condemnation, with many critics denouncing it as a genocidal war intended for the mass ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population. It is perceived that by engaging in a conflict with Iran, the Netanyahu's regime aimed to divert international attention from the massacre in Gaza to Iran, thereby mitigating political fallout and reshaping its international image from aggressor to victim.

 

Furthermore, in the period leading up to the consulate attack, public dissatisfaction within Israel over Netanyahu's economic policies had seen his popularity reach a historical low, with increasing demands for his resignation. A conflict with Iran could potentially consolidate domestic support by distracting from internal discontent.

 

Moreover, it was crucial for Israel to strategically manoeuvre the US into direct military confrontation with Iran, showing little regard for the economic costs and the potential loss of American lives, and even risking conflict with formidable powers like Russia and China. This calculated move aimed to provide Israel with a sweeping geopolitical distraction from its ongoing military operations in Gaza. Subsequently, it would create an opportunity for Israel to advance its invasion into the West Bank. The ultimate ambition? Annexing these territories into a unified Israeli settlement.

 

Nevertheless, although Netanyahu has successfully achieved his initial goal of shifting international attention from Gaza to Iran, the effects have been transient and its’ strategic pivot has triggered a series of complex repercussions. These developments have exposed notable vulnerabilities that Israel is facing and introduced unforeseen threats that could inadvertently lead to the destruction of Israel.

 

 

The Winner and Losers

Israel asserts victory in the aftermath of its recent offensive against Iran; however, empirical evidence suggests a nuanced narrative.

 

Iran's annual military budget, standing at a mere $10.3 billion, presents a stark disparity when compared to Israel's formidable allocation of $270 billion per annum. This glaring discrepancy is compounded by the military assistance Israel receives, including the acquisition of free war machines like the two Dolphin-class submarines generously gifted by Germany for potential use against Iran. Additionally, Israel benefits from notable discounts on the procurement of various military equipment, further bolstering its military capabilities beyond the figures alone.

 

Thus, this vast disparity underscores Iran's reliance on outdated and occasionally obsolete military technology. In sharp contrast, Israel benefits notablely from access to cutting-edge Western, particularly US, defence technology. Consequently, Iran finds itself notablely disadvantaged in terms of defence capability. Compounded by its limited budget and enduring sanctions, the Iranian military, under the Islamic regime, has prioritised offensive strategies over defensive measures. This strategic shift is evident in its considerable investment in ballistic missile development, intended as a deterrent against potential adversaries.

 

Yet, this emphasis on offensive capabilities leaves Iran exposed and vulnerable to external threats. Even the insurgent forces like the Taliban in neighbouring Afghanistan pose a formidable challenge to Iran's defensive capabilities. The situation is exacerbated by Israel's technological superiority and its unwavering support from the United States and European powers, which function as de facto proxy states, providing Israel with considerable military and intelligence resources.

 

Therefore, Iran's defence of critical installations such as TAB-8, a primary target in Israel's attack on April 19th, relied on antiquated defensive armaments, notably the Soviet-era ZU-23 anti-aircraft autocannon dating back to the 1950s. This weapon, originally formidable, proved grossly inadequate against Iraq's third-generation fighter jets during the prolonged conflict and stood little chance against the advanced US fighters, particularly the F-35 Lightning II stealth jets, magnifying the notable technological gap between the two countries.

 

Consequently, Israel's assault on Iran's TAB-8 installation was executed with alarming ease, laying bare the stark technological disparity and debunking any assertions of military victory perpetuated by Western media outlets, with a clear pro-Israel bias, who have relentlessly pushed such narratives since yesterday, underscoring the entrenched geopolitical dynamics at play.

 

On the other hand, Iran's retaliatory strike on Israel on April 13th showcased the Islamic regime's capacity for inflicting considerable harm on its adversary for several compelling reasons.

 

Primarily, The Islamic regime in Iran provided advance notice to the United States and, by extension, Israel, of its intent to attack Israel 72 hours prior to the missile and drone strike on April 13th. Consequently, the Pentagon orchestrated a multinational, region-wide defence initiative spanning from northern Iraq to the southern Persian Gulf in anticipation of the onslaught. Moreover, according to US intelligence estimates, half of the weapons launched by The Islamic regime in Iran either malfunctioned upon launch or during flight due to technical glitches. Of the remaining arsenal, the majority were intercepted by US forces, with additional interceptions carried out by UK, France, and Jordanian contingents. Those projectiles that breached the defences and reached Israeli territory were neutralised by Israel's Iron Dome system.

 

Secondly, as disclosed by a senior US Air Force official, initial assessments suggest that approximately half of Iran’s weaponry encountered technical malfunctions of varying degrees. Intelligence reports from US sources indicate that around half of the armaments deployed by the Islamic regime either malfunctioned upon launch or during flight due to technical deficiencies. Of the remaining arsenal, comprising roughly 160 units, the majority were neutralised by US forces, with a handful intercepted by British, French, and Jordanian counterparts, alongside Israel's Iron Dome defence system.

 

Thirdly, the Islamic regime opted for the deployment of relatively basic drones and missiles in this operation. Despite the extensive defensive measures enacted by Israel, the US, and their allies, seven ballistic missiles succeeded in breaching heavily fortified air and land defences, striking Israeli territory. Notably, four missiles targeted the Nevatim air base in the Negev desert, southern Israel, where Israel's fleet of US-made F-35s are stationed, a strategic location identified as Iran's primary objective.

 

fourthly, none of the ballistic and cruise missiles launched at Israel were equipped with full payloads in their warheads. This suggests that the primary objective was to demonstrate strength rather than cause notable harm.

 

Nevertheless, the gravest and unsettling concern for Israel lies in the fact that seven of these missiles successfully breached the intricate defensive structures, finding their mark within the confines of their airbase. Remarkably, the ensuing damage remained minimal, attributable to the absence of warheads upon impact. This occurrence assumes paramount importance considering the elaborate defensive measures implemented on that particular day, orchestrated not only by the United States but also by its allied European nations. The United States had previously bolstered the region's defences with its state-of-the-art Ballistic Missile Early Warning System (BMEWS). Despite these formidable technical provisions, they proved insufficient in thwarting the incursion of the Iranian missiles, thereby exacerbating Israel's vulnerability to such threats.

 

In addition, it is logical to surmise that the Islamic regime in Iran has extracted valuable insights into the operational methodologies of Western and Israeli defence systems during such encounters. This knowledge likely encompasses both strengths and vulnerabilities, information that may well be shared with strategic partners such as Russia and China. Over time, this intelligence sharing could pose a notable challenge to the interests of the US and its allies.

 

Consequently, the Islamic regime emerges as the apparent victor in this firework exchange, showcasing its ability to launch an assault on Israel without giving Israel a 72-hour notice. This strategic move effectively prevents potential intervention from world superpowers, including the US and European powers, thereby granting the Islamic regime a notable advantage. On April 19, the Islamic regime demonstrated that if it chooses to deploy its formidable arsenal against Israel with the aim of destabilising the country, it could do so simply by utilising an overwhelming number of advanced ballistic and cruise missiles. Armed with full payloads, including hypersonic ballistic missiles, the regime could swiftly inflict considerable damage on Israeli territory. This capability poses a grave threat to Israel's security and underscores the immense power wielded by the Islamic regime.

 

Therefore, this harsh reality of fear compelled Netanyahu, notwithstanding his reputation for obstinacy and irrationality, to forego a full-scale retaliatory response. Instead, he opted for a symbolic military demonstration during the April 19th attack on TAB-8, ensuring no damage was inflicted on the facility or loss of life incurred, in order not to provoke the Islamic regime further.

 

Having said that, the symbolic strike carried out by Israel ultimately fell short of the expectations set by the Islamic regime in Iran too. The posturing and warnings leading up to this attack, seemingly indicating a fear of Israeli retaliation, ultimately amounted to mere bluster. The Islamic regime had expected a well-contextualised response from Israel following its pre-announced, non-injurious strike on Israel, perceiving it as an opening to withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and embark on the construction of its nuclear weaponry stockpile.

 

 

Conclusion

Under Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership, the Israeli government embarked on a notable gamble, failing to achieve its intended objectives and triggering a considerable backlash that exacerbated Israel's vulnerabilities, surpassing the peril it faced prior to April 1, 2024. This pivotal moment underscored Israel's reliance on prior warnings from The Islamic regime in Iran and the indispensable support of the United States and its allies for its defence capabilities. Simultaneously, it emboldened the Islamic regime in Tehran, laying the groundwork for future confrontations with Israel. Furthermore, the debacle highlighted Israel's susceptibility to attacks from the Islamic regime's proxy terror networks across the region, compelling Israeli authorities to refrain from preemptive strikes, thereby reinforcing the adversaries' resolve to eradicate Israel.

 

Moreover, although Israel briefly managed to divert international attention from Gaza to Iran, the failure to achieve its objectives ensures a swift reversion of focus to the ongoing Gaza conflict. Despite persistent advocacy from pro-Israeli Western media outlets, following the Israeli airstrike on the Islamic regime consulate in Damascus on April 1st, the international community has gained insight into Israel's never-ending aggressions, particularly among the younger generation aged 16 to 29, especially students. This section of world societies, especially in the United States and Europe, which is not following the main pro-Israeli biased media outlets and primarily relies on social media platforms such as X (former Twitter), Snapchat, and TikTok (which is why the US banned TikTok), has now become aware of the tactics Israel and their governments employ to divert attention from Israeli atrocities in Gaza to Iran or other countries. Consequently, this awareness is compelling them to raise their voices more forcefully. While these Western governments may appear polished on the surface, their actions often mirror those of despotic regimes such as Iran, China, or Russia, especially with their track records of human rights abuses in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya, and their apparent disregard for the ongoing genocide in Palestine. Therefore, in response to the growing dissent, these governments may resort to harsh measures to suppress and silence dissenting voices.

 

Furthermore, certain nations that have opted to maintain neutrality towards Israel, or even those with pro-Israeli stances, have now gleaned insights into Israel's vulnerabilities. They will alter their approach to Israel, akin to the natural world's response to a wounded creature, an awareness that invites aggression. As a result, there will be a noticeable shift away from pro-Israeli sentiments among those governments, accompanied by increasing pressure to hold Israel accountable. This trajectory may culminate in international legal proceedings and charges of crimes against humanity.

 

Therefore, the foolish decision to gamble with Israel's security and initiate a war with Iran reflects not only the hubris and miscalculation of Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government but also underscores broader geopolitical tensions and power dynamics that ultimately jeopardise Israel's stability and security.

 

However, a victim has emerged as a casualty of the failed Israeli gambit, and this time it's the Iranian nation in their ongoing struggle against the entrenched Islamofascist regime. This development not only solidifies the regime's stance as a formidable opponent of Israel but also signals a concerning escalation in its oppression of Iranians, particularly targeting women who have been at the forefront of resistance against the regime's oppressive policies.

 

The regime's next move entails further oppression, imprisonment, and executions of anyone daring to voice opposition against its tyrannical rule. In the case of Iranian women, it aims to intensify the enforcement of its regressive Hijab laws, perpetuating a climate of further suppression and subjugation of Iranian women and strip them of their rights, aligning with barbaric Islamic Sharia law, evoking memories of the Arabia of the 14th century, which even to Iranians of that time was considered savagery, let alone in the modern era of the 21st century.

 

Shapour Suren-Pahlav

20th April 2024

 

Shortened link to the article: https://bit.ly/3xM4XpE