How Seriously Should We Take Iran’s Repeated Threats of an All-Out War Against Israel?

Iran has time and again threatened to attack Israeli nuclear facilities and cities, leading many to question whether this increasingly aggressive rhetoric is part of a larger plan to gain concessions.

January 4, 2022

Author

Anchal Agarwal
How Seriously Should We Take Iran’s Repeated Threats of an All-Out War Against Israel? 
IMAGE SOURCE: FOREIGN POLICY

Tensions in the Middle East have been rising with Iran’s rapidly advancing nuclear programme, its election of hardliner Ebrahim Raisi as president, and its repeated threats to annihilate Israel. 

Last week, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) warned of delivering the “fiercest blow” to Israel, threatening to attack both its Dimona nuclear facility and cities like Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Haifa. Likewise, in November, army spokesperson Brig.-Gen. Abolfazl Shekarchi called for the destruction of Israel.

To this end, Iran has deployed a variety of tactics in its conflict with Israel. For instance, it has escalated its proxy war against Israel through its support for Hamas in Palestine, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. It also has permanent military bases in Syria near the country’s border with Israel, where dozens of IRGC troops operate from.

Similarly, two Israeli media outlets were hacked this week to show propaganda videos of an IRGC mock attack on Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor. Likewise, last month, an Iran-affiliated hacking group attacked seven Israeli targets, including its government and the business sector. Iran has also allegedly employed more direct means of targeting Israel. For example, in August, it was accused of launching a drone attack on an oil tanker owned by an Israeli businessman off the coast of Oman.

In response to what it sees as an “existential threat,” Israel has targeted scientists, engineers, and technicians working at Iran’s nuclear facilities and sometimes the facilities themselves. In fact, Defence Minister Benny Gantz has previously said, “I do not rule out the possibility that Israel will have to take action in the future in order to prevent a nuclear Iran.”

In June 2020, then-Defence Minister Naftali Bennett ordered a strike on Iran’s strategic Shahid Rajaee Port. Similarly, in July 2020, Israel was accused of conducting a cyberattack against the Natanz nuclear enrichment facility that caused significant damage to the plant’s centrifuge machinery. Furthermore, Iranian authorities have blamed Israel for the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the country’s leading scientist and the mastermind behind Tehran’s nuclear weapons programme. 

Moreover, like Iran, Israel also relies heavily on its cooperation with its powerful allies and alleged proxies, such as the United States (US), Saudi Arabia, and Azerbaijan. For instance, in May 2020, the US deployed its navy in the Caribbean to intervene and disrupt the transfer of Iranian fuel to Venezuela, much to the delight of Israel.

Yet, despite these evidently escalatory measures, would Iran actually wage a full-blown war with Israel, and if not, then what’s behind its increasingly aggressive rhetoric? 

In spite of its multiple threats and the long-drawn nature of its conflict with Israel, Iran remains unlikely to attack Israel because doing so would further endanger the already slim possibility of the US withdrawing sanctions and may in fact invite further punitive measures. After now-former US President Trump withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA) in 2018 and reimposed sanctions on Iran, the Islamic Republic’s oil exports dropped from 2.8 million barrels a day to as low as 200,000 per day. To be subjected to further sanctions would cripple its already reeling economy which has been further weakened by the pandemic.

Moreover, the US has vowed to defend Israel against Iranian aggression. In fact, prior to the meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and US President Joe Biden in August 2020, a senior US administration official said, “Iran will be a big topic of discussion because Iran is a threat to Israel, and we are 100 per cent committed to the security of Israel - no ifs, and, or buts.”

Therefore, Iran is likely to be dissuaded by the economic and military costs of waging an all-out war. In this respect, it could be argued that its seemingly volatile approach is guided by an underlying motive of strongarming the US into reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and recalling sanctions. Keeping this in mind, Iran has insisted that it will only sign a new nuclear deal with world powers if it matches the 2015 agreement. 

Israel, of course, is opposed to the nuclear deal in its entirety and is concerned that while Iran is not currently prepared to wage war, the signing of a new nuclear deal would effectively offer international approval for it to do so. In August, Israel’s Defence Minister Benny Gantz said, “Iran is only around ten weeks away from acquiring weapons-grade materials necessary for a nuclear weapon.”

Under the JCPoA, Iran had agreed to limit its uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. The agreement allowed Iran to enrich uranium at the Natanz facility using 5,000 first-generation IR-1 centrifuges, capped the purity to which it could enrich uranium at 3.67% for the next 15 years, and gave the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to Iran’s nuclear facilities. But Iran abandoned these commitments when the US pulled out of the deal and reimposed sanctions.

In August, the IAEA reported that Iran has now enriched uranium to 60% fissile purity, ever-closer to the weapons-grade level of 90%. Furthermore, Iran has restricted IAEA inspectors from accessing surveillance images captured by the Agency’s cameras at nuclear sites. Therefore, given that it has far surpassed the stipulations on the nuclear programme listed in the 2015 deal, the revival of the deal in its previous form would essentially be a tacit recognition of Iran’s nuclear programme in its current state and would mark a huge coup for the embattled state.

While the ultimate rewards of this strategy for Iran remain unclear and questionable at this stage, Iran can take solace in the fact that this form of brinkmanship has worked for Vladimir Putin in his negotiations with the US and other Western powers. Putin’s calculated and aggressive leadership has previously forced the West to the negotiating table and resulted in the extension of the New START Treaty, a meeting with Biden in Geneva and another one just this month, the waiving of sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and the resumption of dialogue on cybersecurity and strategic stability that was suspended after the 2014 invasion. Likewise, amid escalating tensions over the Ukraine border conflict, the Russian’s tactics led to leader German Defence Minister Christine Lambrecht saying that NATO allies are willing to discuss Russia’s demands concerning the Organization and its potential eastward expansion. In this respect, 

It is yet to be seen how the eighth round of negotiations pans out, as neither side is willing to compromise or back down from their demands. Despite worrying recent developments, it remains unlikely that Iran would wage a full-blown war with Israel instead of using its proxies, which have Israel surrounded on three sides. However, given that the US and its allies remain highly unlikely to revert back to the 2015 deal, Iran’s increasingly vociferous threats to Israel appear to have no short- or long-term benefits. But now that it has backed itself into a corner, Iran has little choice but to continue its capricious approach, lest it appears weak. 

Author

Anchal Agarwal

Former Writer

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay updated with the latest news from around the globe