Israel’s strikes in Iran set the stage for future attacks and a change in US policy

With the passage of time since Israel’s airstrikes on Iran early Saturday, the tone coming out of Tehran appears to be changing.

In the first hours immediately after the attack, the official line was that Iran managed to repel the Israeli attack and that the damage, if any, was minor. The Tasnim news agency, close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, hastened to announce that only 20 Israeli jets were involved in the attack and that they were prevented from entering Iranian airspace by the regime’s anti-aircraft forces.

But then later on Saturday, the Iranians began to understand the intensity and depth of the damage. General Ismail Kosri, a senior member of the Revolutionary Guards and a member of Iran’s Supreme Security Council, said, “Israel must pay for the intrusion into Iranian skies and the Israelis must get used to the reality of living in shelters.”

The assessment coming out of Iran is now starting to match that of the US and Israel, who believe that the strike did significant damage to Iran’s air-defense systems and missile program.

The decision on whether to respond currently rests with the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and while he spoke somewhat ambiguously on Sunday, so far other senior Iranian officials have stayed silent — either out of embarrassment or out of fear of making promises they cannot keep. One thing seems clear: Iran suffered a bigger blow than it expected.

The US issued a warning to Tehran not to respond, with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin saying, “Iran should not make the mistake of responding to Israel’s strikes, which should mark the end of this exchange.”

US President Joe Biden told reporters that “it looks like [Israel] didn’t hit anything other than military targets,” saying that his “hope is this is the end” of the exchange of fire between the two major Middle Eastern military powers.

Israel may have hoped for a more forceful statement from the US to deter Iran from responding, but such a threat is unlikely to be issued just over a week before the presidential elections.

Israel made a clear choice to not push Iran into a corner, choosing limited strikes on military targets instead of a larger attack on energy infrastructure or government targets as had been discussed in recent weeks. The IDF spokesman’s statement at the time of the attack put clear emphasis on the fact that the strikes were “targeted” and aimed at military sites alone.

Iran said its October 1 missile attack on Israel, which involved the launch of almost 200 ballistic missiles, solely targeted military sites. The IDF Spokesman’s statement indicates that the Israeli response was aimed at proportionality and deterrence, not escalation.

While the damage from Israel’s attack is clearly extensive, the fact that most of the damage was away from population centers and was limited to military bases leaves the Iranians room to say that the strikes were unsuccessful, or that they don’t need to respond.

Hidden damage

Israel may have also attacked sites in Iran that the regime is unlikely to reveal to the public, some of which are secretive and related to the country’s nuclear project.

One such target may have been in the city of Karaj, northwest of Tehran, where Israel struck a number of anti-aircraft batteries. Karaj, however, is home to the centrifuge industry of Iran’s nuclear system, and it is entirely possible that Israel’s strikes in the city were not limited to the missile systems.

The Karaj centrifuge facility has been targeted in the past, with a major attack in 2021 being widely attributed to Israel though it never claimed responsibility.

According to a report in the New York Times, Israeli also targeted the secretive Parchin military base on the outskirts of Tehran on Saturday. The report cited Iranian officials as saying that the site was hit during the Israeli attack.

Satellite photos analyzed by The Associated Press show damage to the Parchin base, where the International Atomic Energy Agency has accused Iran of conducting tests of high explosives that could trigger a nuclear weapon. Iran long has insisted its nuclear program is peaceful, though the IAEA, Western intelligence agencies and others say Tehran had an active weapons program at least up until 2003.

The site came under renewed scrutiny by the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2015 when Tehran reached a landmark deal with major powers under which it agreed to curb its nuclear activities under UN supervision in return for the lifting of international sanctions. The deal has since fallen apart.

Iran had previously denied the IAEA access to Parchin, insisting it was a military site unrelated to any nuclear activities, but the agency’s then-chief, the late Yukiya Amano, paid a visit to the site. The IAEA reported finding traces of enriched uranium in soil samples taken from the site, but Iran has consistently denied the validity of those findings.

Since then, there has been continued suspicion that Iran uses the site for nuclear detonation research, and Israel’s reported targeting of the site this weekend may renew international interest in the facility.

Groundwork for the next attack

The main target of the Israeli attack, Iran’s air defense systems and missile industry, laid the groundwork for the next attack. The alleged damage to Iran’s flagship air-defense systems, the Russian-made S-300, allows Israel greater freedom of action over Iranian skies.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Iran had four S-300 systems before the attack, and that all four were destroyed by Israel, citing an Israeli official.

The attacks on the air defenses caused “deep alarm” in Iran, The New York Times reported, citing three unnamed Iranian officials — one from the country’s oil ministry — since it rendered key energy sites defenseless to future strikes.

Israel also reportedly delivered a “crippling” blow to Iran’s missile industry, striking at least 12 planetary mixers used to make solid fuel used in long-range ballistic missiles, reports said, with some putting the number of mixers struck at 20.

The Saudi Elaph news site reported, citing an unnamed informed source, that the heavy fuel mixers had been used to power Khaybar and Qassem missiles, ballistic missiles that were launched at Israel in the Iranian strike earlier this month.

The source claimed it would take two years to repair the factory, which was completely destroyed. It did not say where the factory was located.

The Axios news site cited Israeli sources and a US official as saying Iran can’t produce the mixers on its own and must acquire them from China, which may take more than a year. The report also said the development would limit Tehran’s ability to supply ballistic missiles to its proxies, such as Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Yemen’s Houthi rebels, both terror groups.

America’s decision time

As much as the United States tries to tread lightly regarding the Iranian issue, it seems that the Israeli strikes are pushing the US, regardless of who the next president is, toward a decision on a new policy regarding Iran.

The current situation, where Iran is very close to acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities — posing threats to regional countries, global fuel supplies, shipping lanes and US interests — even as it engages in direct and indirect conflict with Israel, makes it much more than just background noise. The US knows this situation needs to be resolved.

So far, Washington has refrained from making direct threats against Tehran, both declaratively and practically, even in recent weeks. According to sources in Israel, this must change.

Now that Israel has officially struck in Iran for the first time, and did so in compliance with the Biden administration’s stringent conditions, it expects an appropriate change in US policy.

Translated and edited from the original Hebrew on The Times of Israel’s sister site Zman Yisrael.