No more war

The unprecedented missile attack by Iran on Israel (April 13) has created even more uncertainty in the already frenzied international system. The strikes were made in response to the Israel attack on the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Syria on April 1, which resulted in several casualties.

Senior Israel officials consider the Iranian attack as a mask-off moment for Tehran, whereas the reality is somewhat different. A professor of military sociology at the Open University of Israel, Mr Yagil Levy argues that “Israel went too far in assassinating the Iranian general, probably, in a diplomatic location.”

According to US officials, Israel carried out a retaliatory operation against Iran in the early hours of Friday, April 19 in response to the previous events. The strike targeted at least one military installation situated outside of Isfahan, approximately 75 miles south of Tehran. The objective of the strikes was directed towards a military base.

Iranian media has downplayed the severity of the attack, characterizing it as a minor incident involving a limited number of explosions and attributing the incident to infiltrators rather than acknowledging Israeli involvement. This indicates Iran’s efforts to avert a full-scale conflict with Israel.

Additionally, reports indicated that the scale of the Israeli strikes was relatively modest compared to previous Iranian actions against Israel, involving the use of missiles and drones.

In the volatile landscape of the Middle East, where tensions simmer and conflicts brew, the spectre of a showdown between Iran and Israel looms ominously. Yet, despite the sabre-rattling and geopolitical manoeuvring, both nations exercise caution, and are aware of the cataclysmic consequences of what a full-fledged conflict would unleash.

With regard to Iran, the prospect of engaging in war with Israel represents a perilous gambit with multifaceted repercussions. First, such a move would ignite a hailstorm of diplomatic condemnations, isolating Iran on the global stage and threatening its nuclear ambitions. The international community overwhelmingly supports Israel, which means that if a war were to break out between Iran and Israel, Iran would face serious consequences, particularly concerning its nuclear programme.

Moreover, the fallout from attacking Israel may invite swift and devastating retaliation from the US and its allies. The ripple effects would extend beyond the borders of Iran, disrupting its proxies in neighbouring states like Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon, destabilizing the region further and eroding Iran’s influence. The repercussions are not confined to the realm of geopolitics: Iran’s economic and diplomatic ties would suffer a severe blow, particularly with potential trade partners like India.

Given India’s strategic allegiance to Israel, a conflict between Iran and Israel would likely prompt India to overtly align itself with Israel, jeopardizing Iran’s diplomatic and trade interests and exacerbating its isolation on the regional stage.

The spectre of nuclear annihilation looms large over any military confrontation between Iran and Israel. In the event of conflict, Iran faces the grim possibility of a nuclear strike from Israel, targeting its nuclear facilities and tilting the scales of war decisively against Iran. The potential for catastrophic loss of life and devastation underscores the recklessness of pursuing war as a viable option.

Israel, too, treads cautiously in the face of escalating tensions with Iran, weighed down by its strategic imperatives and geopolitical realities. While the temptation to confront Iran may be strong, Israel is mindful of the precarious balance it must maintain to safeguard its territorial ambitions and regional hegemony.

Israel’s vision of ‘Greater Israel’, encompassing territories such as the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and parts of Syria and Lebanon, convinces Tel Aviv not to engage in a protracted conflict with Iran. The pursuit of expansionism necessitates a delicate balance of diplomacy and deterrence, whereas the outright confrontation risks alienating potential allies and jeopardizing long-term objectives.

Israel’s calculus is influenced by the shifting sands of regional politics. Arab countries, once steadfast adversaries, are increasingly willing to engage with Israel on matters of mutual interest. However, a conflict with Iran threatens to unravel these fragile alliances, as demonstrated by recent refusals from Saudi Arabia and the UAE to provide airspace for potential strikes against Iran.

The involvement of major powers like Russia and the US would introduce further complexity to the situation. Should a war erupt, the Middle East may once again become a battleground, drawing in external actors, and exacerbating the existing chaos.

With Iraq and Iran experiencing the brunt of conflict; Hezbollah in Lebanon poised to resume hostilities; and Syria caught amidst the crossfire, the region could face an overwhelming and unmanageable crisis.

In this volatile scenario, it is imperative to emphasize the necessity of restraint. The toll of war, both in terms of human lives and geopolitical stability, is too great to bear. Instead, prioritizing diplomacy offers a viable pathway towards de-escalation and constructive dialogue.

Only through concerted efforts of cooperation and compromise can the spectre of conflict be dispelled, thereby paving the way for a more peaceful and prosperous future for all stakeholders.

The writers work at the Centre for

International Strategic Studies

Islamabad (CISS).