From strategic patience to sincere promise: Where will Iran's strike take the region?

Not interested in a wider regional war, Iran–from the Supreme Leader to the president and the foreign minister—did not directly involve itself in the defence of Gaza under Israeli assault.

It also placed limits on the scope and intensity of Hezbollah's strikes into Israel, not wanting to sacrifice its crown jewel militia in the region over the Israeli offensive in Gaza.

In the past six months, Israel frequently targeted Hezbollah bases and areas of deployment in Lebanon, reaching as far away as Baalbek, the Bekaa Valley, the southern suburbs of Beirut, and, of course, in Syria—and these attacks continue.

All the while, Iran exercised restraint and patience. Now, things have changed. The change in approach is now clear, but the full consequences are not.

Why now?

Iran's direct response to Israeli aggression came about for several reasons, including a sense in Iran that it was losing face among the Arab militias in the region belonging to its so-called "Axis of Resistance".

Certainly, there were reports that Hamas was disappointed that Iran did not come to its immediate support during the first weeks of the war.

It also believed that participating in the war would not necessarily bring about meaningful change for Palestinians despite the growing popular support for their cause globally.

Read more: Palestinians must capitalise on the growing global support for their cause

There are also doubts that Iran actually wants a Palestinian state since it has been able to exploit the issue for its own strategic gain in the region.

Three observations

Regardless of the reasons why Iran finally chose to strike back, three observations can be drawn showing how its actions made it look weak.

First, if Iran is truly interested in confronting Israel, wouldn't it have been better to do so from the start of the war in October to demonstrate its seriousness in confronting its so-called arch-enemy?

Second, If its response was meant to be serious, wouldn't it have coordinated with Hezbollah to launch a dual offensive?

Third, Iran's action appeared to be more about bolstering its domestic and regional popularity.

Additionally, if Iran were truly serious about weakening Israel, it wouldn't have thrown its weight, money and efforts at weakening Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq in the past decade. Its regional interventions in Arab states have only made Israel stronger.

Whatever else, it is too early to predict the future actions of Iran or Israel. Will the region enter a stage of more dangerous escalations, or will global efforts to cool off tensions prevail?

Will the US try to use Iran's strike on Israel to hit back at Tehran and weaken its regional proxies?

The answers may become clearer based on Israel's forthcoming action – or inaction – in the days ahead.