Does Iran, beneath all its tough talk and anti-Israel, anti-U.S. bluster, actually want to go to war?
That question is once again front and center in Washington and around the world. Speculation is swirling in national security circles that Tehran’s unprecedented weekend attack on Israel was crafted to appear spectacular and aggressive but not intended to be its opening salvo in a full-blown conflict.
Iran’s proxies — Hamas, Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthi rebels, and Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria — are responsible for a great deal of death, destruction and destabilization across the Middle East. Each of those groups has blood on its hands that can be traced back to the regime in Tehran.
Still, the Iranian government seems reluctant to plunge into direct war with its greatest foes, Israel and the U.S. Instead, it seems to crave a state of near war or constant tension that stops short of the kind of conflict that could thrust the entire country into chaos.
“The Islamic republic thrives on a state of conflict, not war,” said Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank. “Tehran accomplished the lion’s share of its goals against Israel in the week before it launched missiles. Literally, the world was watching and waiting on Iran, forced to take their threats seriously due to their increasing drone and missile use in the region. This was a status boon and a security boon.”
Indeed, Iran was arguably the most impactful player in global affairs over the past two weeks as the world waited to see how it would respond to the April 1 strike on its embassy complex in Syria, widely thought to have been carried out by Israel. That strike killed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Mohammad Reza Zahedi and other Iranian officials, and the regime in Tehran vowed revenge against Israel.
On Saturday, Iran launched more than 300 drones and missiles toward Israel in what became a global media spectacle. About 99% of the Iranian missiles and drones were shot down. Israel sustained minimal damage to its territory, and only one injury was reported.
By most traditional military metrics, the attack was a failure. Still, Iranian officials quickly declared they had exacted their revenge and it was time to move on.
“Iran’s military action was in response to the Zionist regime’s aggression against our diplomatic premises in Damascus. The matter can be deemed concluded,” Iran’s mission to the United Nations said in a statement while Iranian drones were in the air. “However, should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran’s response will be considerably more severe.”
Iran also has had the opportunity to launch an all-out conflict with the U.S. In January 2020, President Trump ordered an airstrike in Baghdad that killed Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, whom the administration painted as the key conduit between Tehran and Shiite militias that routinely attacked U.S. troops.
Iran responded a week later with a series of missile attacks on two U.S. bases in Iraq that the Pentagon said caused brain injuries to more than 100 American troops.
Iran, while responding with military aggression, did not seem to want the situation to deteriorate into a full-blown war. The two nations ultimately stopped short of such a conflict, though tensions have remained high and Iranian proxies have continued to target American personnel in the region.
SEE ALSO: Israel will respond militarily to Iran’s attack, British official says
Crucial moment for Israel
The situation between Iran and Israel is potentially even more of a powder keg against the backdrop of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by the Palestinian militant group Hamas. Tehran financially and logistically backs the group.
Iran has traditionally relied on such proxy groups to target Israel. Saturday was the first time Iran itself launched an attack on the Jewish state.
The White House denies that the attack was designed to fail.
“Given the scale of this attack, Iran’s intent was clearly to cause significant destruction and casualties,” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters on Monday.
Israel is still weighing its response to the Iranian attack. Although the damage was minimal, the Jewish state seems determined to respond.
“We cannot stand still from this kind of aggression,” Israel Defense Forces spokesman Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari told reporters Tuesday, according to Israeli media.
Other Israeli officials signaled that they are fully aware of the significance of their next step and seem reluctant to be viewed as taking a disproportionate response that could spark a much broader regional war.
“Israel will act out of strategic wisdom and will respond in the place, time and manner it chooses,” Benny Gantz, a former Israeli defense minister and a member of the country’s wartime Cabinet, said Tuesday, according to the Times of Israel.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken used the word “wisdom” on Monday when explaining how Israel should consider its response. Israel received a similar message from London. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday.
“The prime minister said Iran had badly miscalculated and was increasingly isolated on the global stage, with the G7 coordinating a diplomatic response,” the British prime minister’s office said in a readout of the call, according to British media. “He stressed that significant escalation was in no one’s interest and would only deepen insecurity in the Middle East. This was a moment for calm heads to prevail.”
• Ben Wolfgang can be reached at bwolfgang@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.