The hostile relationship between Iran and Israel is a cauldron which, when it boils over, poses a grave escalation threat across the Middle East. That point has been reached this weekend, with events that echo the tinderbox effect of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. The massive drone and missile attack by Iran on Israel aims to show that Iran has both the firepower and immunity from western influence.
The question facing the region and testing its western allies, already finding it hard to hold together a united front over the war in Gaza, is whether this is now an “honour satisfied” scenario – or the first move in a dangerous chain reaction and escalatory spiral towards all-out war, drawing in other players in the Middle East.
In the first scenario, Tehran can claim that it has extracted due revenge for the Damascus attack on 1 April and Israel’s fiery leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, can equally be persuaded by the US to exercise restraint in his next moves.
It is just as likely however that for Netanyahu, a leader who has long warned that the West is turning a blind eye to Iran’s pattern of using proxy forces including Hezbollah, the Houthi militias and ultimately Hamas to undermine Israel’s security, will argue that a military reaction from Israel is called for. That would test allies, including Britain, in a conflict which, as well as its intersection with the ongoing war in Gaza, has much greater potential to draw in other major geo-political players, from the US to Russia.
Although the theatre of this war is geographically distant from the UK, our political leaders are struggling to calibrate policy between support for Israeli democracy – under threat from Iran and Hamas – and the horror at the humanitarian effects of the counter-offensive in Gaza. It has proved a difficult line to tread and it will be even shakier in the wake of Iran’s attack, because the risks of mis-stepping are so consequential.
When the Commons meets on Monday in emergency session, we will see alignment between Labour and the Conservatives on the “deep concern” narrative and calls for calm. Beneath that unity however, lies uncertainty and tension about what should follow.
Rishi Sunak’s statement today described Tehran’s direct assault on Israel as “reckless” and a G7 meeting will be hastily scrambled to pull as many of the leading military and economic powers into a joint position, to avoid the kind of gaps opening up in the West which are undermining a clear response to the Gaza fighting.
The UK is also, by virtue of its Operation Shader mission in the region, deploying RAF jets over Iraq and Syria to intercept drone attacks as part of its role in a coalition to defeat the Isis terror group and its facilitators. That has now morphed into a role heading off drone attacks from Iran which pass through the territory covered by this remit. It is not explicitly in the Operation Shader task list, but a reminder that once conflicts begin, drawing firm lines on involvement gets a lot harder.
The Government is seeking to balance support for Israel – which will now have to be explicitly restated by Labour and the Tories – with appeals for bigger and faster humanitarian aide and how soon a durable ceasefire can be achieved in Gaza. Failures are more likely than successes in such matters. Lord Cameron has also been one of the most pro-active foreign ministers in seeking to prevent an Iranian attack with intensive diplomacy to the region – and to the Lebanon and to Qatar, as conduits to Tehran. That has not paid off – a worrying sign that hardliners in Iran have instead won a battle for influence.
Of course, the UK is not alone in head-scratching on how to deal with a resurgent and aggressive Iran. This matter is likely to become a fierce dividing line in the US: the Biden administration has largely fudged the matter. Donald Trump will seek to define himself as ready to take on “appeasement” over this issue– and present the Biden restraint doctrine as having not worked. One way or the other, Iran has returned to the fray over security and foreign policy.
A possibly benign outcome is that Tehran’s real position is that this was in essence a show of force in a tit-for-tat revenge attack for the targeting of Iranian operatives and this can now be concluded. The damage appears to be minimal – Israel’s “Iron Dome” defences worked. The wider picture is however less reassuring – a line has been crossed in the direct nature of this attack and Netanyahu is also a leader under electoral pressure and a long-stay power player by virtue of an extraordinary survival instinct who tends not to hold back when cornered. The attack may also have played into his hands, in terms of forcing the US to focus on the Iran threat, rather than their ongoing spat about tactics in Gaza.
Washington will however be concerned that in the wider backdrop of conflicts, including Russia-Ukraine, a 70s-style spike in the oil price will ratchet up economic as well as military tensions – and advise the Netanyahu government to keep cool heads in a period of heated conflicts. The price of war very often exceeds the reasons for embarking on it. This is a time for two hardened adversaries to step back from that prospect – devoutly to be wished, but far from a certain bet.
Anne McElvoy presents the Power Play podcast for POLITICO. The latest episode features Trump adviser Robert Greenway on how to deal with Iran
Starmer and Sunak are struggling to cope with Israel-Iran escalation
6
1
14.04.2024
The hostile relationship between Iran and Israel is a cauldron which, when it boils over, poses a grave escalation threat across the Middle East. That point has been reached this weekend, with events that echo the tinderbox effect of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. The massive drone and missile attack by Iran on Israel aims to show that Iran has both the firepower and immunity from western influence.
The question facing the region and testing its western allies, already finding it hard to hold together a united front over the war in Gaza, is whether this is now an “honour satisfied” scenario – or the first move in a dangerous chain reaction and escalatory spiral towards all-out war, drawing in other players in the Middle East.
In the first scenario, Tehran can claim that it has extracted due revenge for the Damascus attack on 1 April and Israel’s fiery leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, can equally be persuaded by the US to exercise restraint in his next moves.
It is just as likely however that for Netanyahu, a leader who has long warned that the West is turning a blind eye to Iran’s pattern of using proxy forces including Hezbollah, the Houthi militias and ultimately Hamas to undermine Israel’s security, will argue that a military reaction from Israel is called for. That would test allies, including Britain, in a conflict which, as........
© iNews
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
