We are now in the fifth day of this new stage of the conflict between Israel and Iran.
“New stage of the conflict” is hardly a perfect phrase, but it’s hard to think anything better. “War”? The Iranian regime has called for decades for Israel to be wiped out, and has dedicated countless resources to that end, mostly via its proxies. If the strikes on Iran and the ballistic missiles fired at Israel are that of two nations at war, it’s a war which began long ago.
The opening round has unquestionably been won by Israel. It has effectively eliminated the Iranian high command, has won almost total control of Iranian airspace, and has demonstrated the depths of its espionage infiltration. And it continues to do so. On Monday night, it took out Iran’s military chief, Ali Shademani. One of the reasons you may never had heard of him is that he held this role for four days, Israel having eliminated his predecessor last week. The milk in my fridge has lasted longer.
Israel has also reportedly neutralised a number of Iranian nuclear sites, though not all of them – more on that later.
In response, the Iranians have fired ballistic missiles at Israel – an escalation in the aerial warfare that its proxies have been inflicting for decades. The Iron Dome system has done a remarkable job since 2011 in protecting Israel from the thousands of rockets fired at it, mostly by Hamas. Rockets and missiles are not interchangeable words, however. A rocket, as an offensive weapon, is fired unguided, in a general direction, with a desire to cause as much damage as possible – think of the Nazi V1 and V2 rockets, as an example. A missile is guided, usually aimed at a specific target – it may still miss, but it is far more likely to land in the general area which it has been aimed at. And Iron Dome is far less effective against it. This is one of the reasons why the Houthis, despite only firing a tiny fraction of the weapons at Israel that Hamas has, have had a far higher hit rate. Iran, of course, has far more ballistic missiles to fire than its Yemen proxy. In the last four days, it has killed almost as many Israelis via its missiles than Hamas has managed to kill via its projectiles since the advent of Iron Dome in 2011.
Damage from the Iranian missile strikes on Israel: (Credit: Israel MFA)
The awful irony, however, is that the Iran’s actions over the last few decades have steeled the Israeli population for what it is currently undergoing. The thousands of missiles fired at it over the last 20 years have led to Israeli society becoming the most prepared in the world for aerial attacks. Already prior to that, since 1992 amidst the threat of Scud missile attacks from Iraq, by law every new Israeli property contains a safe room – which will not stop a direct hit, but can protect against blast impacts or shrapnel. Many apartments and public buildings contain bomb shelters. Every citizen has an app on their phone which provides warnings of incoming strikes, and directions on when to shelter. While the current Iranian onslaught is more powerful, and is causing more damage, it will not break the will of Israel and its people. It is unclear whether the same can be said for Iran, which has not experienced the same ever-present threat of strikes that it has been causing for the last 20 years.
Israeli emergency responders dig through the rubble left by an Iranian Missile strike (Credit: @Israelpolice)
The American reaction
The key reason Israel gave for the strikes was to prevent the Iranian regime from achieving a nuclear weapon. An IAEA announcement last Thursday that Iran was in breach of its non-proliferation obligations gave Israel a casus belli. We now know that Israel sold the strikes to America by pointing out that Donald Trump had given the Iranian regime 60 days to make a deal. Israel’s strikes on the 61st day, therefore, enabled Trump to show the world that there are, in fact, severe consequences for trying to take advantage of him (something the world had begun to doubt, given Russia’s continued dancing around an American-brokered peace deal between it and Ukraine.) Trump has repeatedly echoed his language of Iran needing to now “make a deal”, but has also repeatedly said in the last few days that Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.
It is all but impossible to predict Trump’s next steps, but it should be remembered that he was scathing about the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, also known as the Iran deal) brokered by the Obama administration, withdrawing the US from it in 2018. He was right – the deal was a disaster, in that it effectively did nothing to reverse Iran’s nuclear development progress (and absolutely nothing to affect its missile programme), but by relaxing sanctions enabled the regime to free up hundreds of millions of dollars to further fund its terror proxies. If Iran does manage to develop a nuclear weapon during Trump’s presidency, it will unquestionably be viewed by the world as a failure by Trump himself – and he has an almost pathological desire to be viewed as a ‘winner’. In a similar vein, it was not at all difficult for Trump to express support for Israel’s initial strikes against the Iranian regime. They were, after all, extraordinarily audacious and successful, and Trump – like most people – likes to be associated with success. When Netanyahu last visited the White House, he attempted to flatter Trump’s ego by giving him a golden pager – linking him to Israel’s devastatingly successful strike on Hezbollah last year. In comments made on Tuesday, Trump described how “we now have complete control of the skies over Iran”, highlighting the role of American equipment – and further associating the US with Israel’s strikes.
On Tuesday, Iran’s Foreign Minister effectively said that Trump could stop Israel proceeding further “with one phone call”. That may be true, but there’s no indication as yet of that phone being picked up. Part of the problem Iran has in that regard is that it has regularly and unambiguously represented America as its enemy. Now turning around and seeking to rely on America to stop Israel makes the regime look even weaker than it currently does. And Trump has now said that he is not interested in negotiating, but rather in the regime’s “total surrender”.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump (The White House, via Wikipedia)
Have Israel’s nuclear objectives been achieved?
Israel was unambiguous in its original description of its decision to strike. It was because Iran was on the cusp of developing nuclear weapons.
There are those, within Israel as well as externally, who have treated this claim with cynicism. They point to the regular announcements over the years by Netanyahu – including a memorable speech to the UN, with visual aids – that Iran was about to go nuclear. They see the timing of this attack as advantageous for the Israeli Prime Minister in terms of further delaying legal proceedings regarding his alleged financial wrongdoing.
There are a number of points, however, which should be taken into account. For one thing, Israel has undertaken different operations over the years to slow down Iran’s nuclear program – the most memorable before now being the Stuxnet computer virus (believed to be a joint Israel-US operation). Another thing to consider is that the operation began after a Knesset vote on Thursday on whether to maintain the current government coalition, not before. Israel also obviously had no part in the IAEA’s statement on Iran was breaching conditions.
Either way, it is clear that Israel’s strikes have come at possibly the most tactically advantageous time in recent years. Had Israel attempted this in 2021, for instance, it would have found itself not just facing direct attack from Iran, but thousands of rockets from Hamas and Hezbollah as well. The simultaneous effect could have been overwhelming. Now, however, Hamas’s ability to strike Israel has been crushed, while Hezbollah has been decapitated. Apart from the occasional missile lobbed from Yemen, the Iranian regime stands alone.
It is clear than Iran’s nuclear capabilities have been badly damaged. Sites at Natanz and Isfahan appear to have been neutralised. Its site at Fordow, however, deep underground, may only be able to be infiltrated by deep-level GBU-57s bunker-busting bombs of the sort that only America is believed to have. Despite original Iranian threats against the US, American interests have not been attacked since Friday, and this may be a reason why. If they were attacked, Trump’s first step might well not be entering the sort of all-out-war he has been so vocal about disliking. It might be to give Israel the GBU-57s it wants and needs. And Israel has made it perfectly clear that this operation is far from over.
IAF fighter jets line up preparatory to strike back at Houthi targets May 2025
Regime Change?
Israel named the Operation “Rising Lion”, in what is believed to be a reference to the lion symbol of the Pahlavi dynasty – toppled in 1979 by the current regime. Netanyahu has also publicly urged the Iranian people to use this opportunity to rise up against the regime.
In the short term, the chances of this seem slight. History suggests that despite the brutality of a regime, if it is externally attacked people tend to rally round the flag. So far, Israel has been careful to specifically strike regime officials and sites. But the longer this operation continues, the higher the chances of civilian casualties mounting. Some of the sites now being targeted are in the middle of major cities. Neighbourhoods of Tehran have been told by the IDF to evacuate ahead of planned strikes; despite the pre-warning, this inevitably leads to chaotic scenes as many people try to leave the city at once. In a social media post on Monday, Israel’s Defence Minister stated that “the residents of Tehran will suffer”. He later clarified that he was talking about regime targets rather than ordinary civilians, but it is precisely that sort of comment that the Iranian regime will cite as proof that Israel intends to target everybody.
It would be wiser for people not to clutch at straws – a few videos of Iranian citizens cheering as targets are struck, a sign hung over a motorway, unconfirmed rumours of inquiries about asylum in Moscow – and assume that the regime is about to crumble. Likewise, while the Iranian crown prince is well supported in a number of Iranian diaspora communities, there is little indication of a groundswell of popular support within Iran itself for the return of the Pahlavis. While the crown prince has been clear that he supports a proper democracy, in its final decades the country ruled by his father was an oppressive autocracy – though the current regime surpassed it in brutality long ago. It should also not be forgotten that the Ayatollahs have regularly demonstrated their willingness to use brute force to crush internal opposition. The worst example was in the late 1980s, when tens of thousands were murdered in response to Operation Mersad. If the regime feels that its situation is existential, it is unlikely to hesitate to use similar measures to maintain control.
Iranian crown prince Reza Pahlavi (Credit: Flickr/Gage Skidmore)
What comes next?
The best case scenario (other than regime change, which as already explained, looks unlikely in the short term) is that Israel successfully completes its stated objectives, completely destroying Iran’s nuclear programme. Israel’s destruction of the nuclear reactor being constructed at Osirak by Saddam Hussein effectively ended that brutal regime’s quest for nuclear weapons. Iran is far further down that road, and as such, the destruction of its entire nuclear infrastructure is likely to take further weeks – in which time Iran will undoubtedly do whatever it can to continue striking Israel.
It is worth remembering, however, that even without the threat of Iran breaking out and creating nuclear weapons, Israel would still be fully justified in attacking a regime which, via its proxies, has been regularly targeting Israel for many years.
Israel’s strikes on the regime so far – including the elimination of many of the regime’s top nuclear scientists – mean that the likelihood of Iran actually speeding up its construction of nuclear weapons and succeeding in doing so are slim. The worst possible danger lies in the regime, both out of desperation and a desire to fulfil its promise to destroy Israel, attempting to use dirty bombs. This would see ballistic missiles packed with radioactive materials – and, while not having anything close to the lethality of nuclear weapons, the damage – and possible death toll – could be significant.
The other worst-case scenario is that Iran lashes out at other targets, outside Israel. In 2022, the UK’s Minister of State for Security stood up in the House of Commons and confirmed that the UK’s security services were aware that the Iranian regime had developed lists – including prominent Jewish people and Iranian dissidents – to target in the UK in the event of an all-out war between Israel and Iran. The Community Security Trust, which exists to protects the UK Jewish community, has made it clear that it has not seen increased signs of likely terror attacks on Jews in the UK, but it has rightly urged caution, given the regime’s track record of targeting Jews around the world.
Whatever happens, this is far from over. Anyone monitoring the situation would be wise to take regular breaks from looking at footage, or engaging in the social media activity known as “doomscrolling” – for the sake of their mental health, if nothing else.
