Iran’s drone armada packed more insight than punch

Although Iran probably has more advanced missiles and drones under its belt, the strike still highlighted the significant military gap between the two sides.

Only a few drones and missiles reached Israel, and none of these did any damage.

Support of allies

Another point of interest was the military support offered from Israel's allies, some of whom have been uncomfortable with Israel's actions in Gaza.

Despite criticising Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in public for "mistakes", the Biden administration still helped Israel militarily, as did Britain and France.

American, British, and French jets all took off from their various bases in the Middle East and took out several Israel-bound drones and missiles.

Israel's advanced air defence systems did the rest. The combination underscored the unwavering Western backing for Israel.

By the same token, Iran's response showed vulnerabilities in the Iran-led 'resistance'.

In particular, the handful of Tehran-backed groups in Iraq refrained from responding and mainly just issued statements. This will have avoided embarrassing Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' Al Sudani ahead of his upcoming meeting with Biden.

Meanwhile, Syria's President Bashar al-Assad, who counts Iran as an indispensable ally, chose to remain neutral and not fire its own weapons.

Involving others

There is a huge physical distance between Israel and Iran, so the drones and missiles had to fly through the airspace of countries in between, such as Iraq, Jordan, and Syria.

American and allied planes also accessed this airspace to intercept them, which just highlighted the inability of these Arab states to protect the sovereignty of their skies.

Although Russia has positioned sophisticated S-400 and S-300 air defence systems in Syria, it opted not to use them against the Iranian weaponry, instead staying neutral.

Moscow's approach is nuanced, balancing its interests with those of its allies.

On the one hand, it seeks to keep Iran close. Tehran is strategically significant, particularly as Russia requires Iranian drones for its war in Ukraine.

On the other, Russia has good relations with Tel Aviv and would rather not compromise these. It thus seeks to preserve diplomatic ties and interests across different fronts.

Establishing deterrence

The dynamics of deterrence are crucial to understanding the events of recent weeks.

Just as Israeli air strikes in Syria and Lebanon aim to deter Iran from encroaching on Israel's northern border, so too Iran's drone and missile barrage will have conveyed a message to Israel that Iran will strike it directly if needs be.

Deterrence is especially important for Israel, whose citizens are still shaken by the ability of Hamas to launch a significant attack from Gaza on 7 October and the inability of Israel's intelligence and security services to predict it or defend it.

Yet, since Iran's drone and missile volley failed to hurt Israel, Iran showed itself incapable of effectively restoring its own deterrence against Israel.

At the same time, its armada only showcased Israel's vastly superior air defence capabilities, including its Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow systems.

These can intercept planes, drones, or missiles at any speed and altitude.  

Although largely symbolic, Iran's attack still represents an unprecedented challenge to the 'idea of Israel' and its perceived invulnerability, similar to the historical impact of previous Arab-Israeli conflicts in 1948, 1967, and 1973.

Israel's response

Israel's allies have urged it not to escalate tension, yet Tel Aviv is nevertheless likely to be considering several strategies.

One of these could be the targeting of Iran's regional proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and even Yemen.

Israel has a track record of attacking Iran-friendly militias, but this time it could opt for a more intensive and prolonged campaign against Iranian positions in these areas.

If it did, there could be an impact on regional stability and the balance of power in Iraq and surrounding areas. The role of the United States may also change.

Given that Iran's drone and missile barrage was a direct military attack against Israel, Netanyahu may consider that Israel now needs to initiate direct military attack against Iran in reply. This would raise the stakes significantly.

The extent to which America and other Western allies assist it in this will be critical to Tel Aviv's decision making.

At the very least, Israel would need US help. This could provoke Iran into retaliating against US interests.

It is noticeable that criticism of the Iranian attack against Israel has deflected attention away from the intense global criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza.

Netanyahu may take this as tacit approval to continue into Rafah, as he has threatened to do.

Furthermore, Israel may escalate its military actions against Hezbollah in Lebanon, since this is Iran's primary proxy in the region.

Whether this would provoke another direct Iranian response remains to be seen.

The role of the US

One of the biggest unknowns is the extent to which Israel plans to target Iran's nuclear programme.

Inspections were introduced during Barack Obama's US administration in 2015 but withdrawn after his successor Donald Trump pulled the plug.

Some felt that the Biden administration would get the Iranians back round the table and renegotiate to limit the ambitions of Iran's nuclear advances, but that has not happened.

In the past, Israel has struck nuclear facilities in Iraq and Syria.

It may consider doing so in Iran, but the physical distance between the two states makes this much more difficult.

It would almost certainly require US involvement, but with US presidential elections in November, Biden may baulk at supporting a direct Israeli attack against Iran unless it was absolutely necessary.

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Galant has spoken about the necessity of an international front against Iranian threats.

This suggests that a potential strategic alliance against Iran may be hastened after Tehran's drone and missile foray.

Evolving situation

Diplomatically, it seems certain that Israel will advocate for sanctions against Iran, such as by designating its Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organisation.

It is also likely to pursue other means to isolate Iran on the world stage, such as with the Islamic Republic's recent expulsion from the United Nations Women's Organisation.

In summary, Iran's strike against Israel on 13 April may yet prove to be a landmark moment with regional repercussions, in a similar way to the impact of the surprise Hamas attack against Israel on 7 October.

The situation is in a state of flux and the evolving dynamics will influence the diplomatic and military action over the coming days and weeks.

There was already a complex interplay of regional and international strategies before Iran's retaliatory response to the consulate bombing.

At such a politically sensitive time in US politics, there is still much to ponder as the dust settles.