As dawn broke over Iran’s capital, the extent of damage from Israel’s boldest attack on the Islamic Republic began to emerge. Yet amidst the wreckage, a defiant Tehran belittled the scale and effectiveness of the airstrikes that targeted its military sites. Iran’s political elite now finds itself grappling with competing pressures on how to respond, even as regional actors and the US urge de-escalation.
The internal debate in Iran revolves around a critical choice: treat Israel’s violation of its sovereignty as a red line demanding swift retaliation or heed the counsel of allies to acknowledge the limited nature of the strikes and step back from the precipice of a wider war. Hardliners in parliament insist the attacks breached the Islamic Republic’s threshold for tolerance and necessitate reprisals, ideally timed to exploit Israel’s entanglements in Lebanon and Gaza.
Government Downplays Damage, Touts Air Defenses
The Iranian government’s initial response aimed to project an image of resilience and tout the performance of its air defense systems against the Israeli onslaught. “Only limited damage has been done,” declared government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani, adding that Iranian pride had been bolstered by the military’s ability to confront the attack. Some officials even claimed Iran’s air defenses proved superior to Israel’s vaunted Iron Dome.
“The fake regime’s attack was defeated by the country’s integrated air defense system,” wrote Shahabeddin Tabatabaei, a reformist member of Iran’s information council.
The foreign ministry issued a measured statement condemning the aggression while asserting Iran’s “right and obligation to defend itself.” The restrained tone suggested an effort to keep options open as the leadership weighs its next move.
Hardliners Demand ‘Surprising’ Response When Israel Vulnerable
In contrast, conservative factions within Iran’s complex power structure struck a more bellicose note, framing the attack as a challenge to the regime’s authority that warrants a decisive reply. Amir-Hossein Sabeti, an ultra-conservative Tehran MP, argued on social media that “the violation of Iran’s red line and invasion of the country’s territory must be answered at a level that will surprise them.” He contended that the optimal time to retaliate would be amid Israel’s “attritional” battles in Gaza and Lebanon.
Calls for an “Operation Promise 3,” a sequel to Iran’s previous attacks on Israel, echoed across hardliner circles. Former president Hassan Rouhani’s advisor Hesamoddin Ashena encapsulated the sentiment, warning Israel that “you played with the lion’s tail…this is Iran.”
Regional Solidarity May Be Leverage for Restraint
As Iran calibrates its response, the stance of regional heavyweights like Saudi Arabia could prove pivotal. A key factor will be whether Tehran views recent diplomatic overtures to its Arab neighbors as a bulwark in tempering the crisis. The swift expressions of solidarity from Gulf states decrying Israel’s “flagrant aggression” against Iran heartened officials in Tehran.
“We are very concerned by the flagrant violation of aggression on Iran this morning,” stated Oman’s foreign minister Badr Albusaidi, echoing a view shared in many Arab capitals. “It’s time for the world to wake up to the urgent need to address the root causes of this crisis, above all Israel’s illegal and brutal occupation of Palestinian lands.”
Iran’s hardliners may well demand proof that the diplomatic dividends it has accrued in the region amount to more than mere statements. At the same time, calls for restraint from Arab states, Turkey and beyond will factor into the calculus of Iran’s decision-makers, who are keenly attuned to the risks of regional isolation.
A Region on Edge Awaits Iran’s Next Move
As the Middle East holds its breath, much rests on which faction gains the upper hand in Tehran’s Strategic Council for Foreign Relations. Will Iran’s relative forbearance after the slaying of a Hamas leader in Tehran and a senior Hezbollah commander in Beirut stay its hand again? Or will the cumulative weight of those assassinations and Israel’s latest airstrikes goad Iran into escalating the tit-for-tat blows into a full-fledged regional conflict?
The internal reckoning comes as President Ebrahim Raisi’s government assesses the true damage to its military assets. According to one internal estimate shared with a British media outlet, the Israeli operation, though falling short of initial fears, still dealt a “significant but not irreparable” blow to Iran’s drone fleet and precision-guided missile production lines.
Against this backdrop, the US has intensified efforts to coax Iran to exercise restraint, even while affirming Israel’s right to self-defense in the face of Iran’s “unrelenting aggression and support for terrorist groups dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state.” Back-channel messages conveyed through intermediaries have dangled the prospect of rekindling nuclear talks and easing sanctions if Iran refrains from retaliating.
That may seem a fanciful hope given the rupture of trust between Washington and Tehran. Still, the White House appears to be banking on Iran’s desire to forestall an even wider conflagration that sucks in American firepower. President Biden is reported to have signed off on the Israeli operation with the proviso that it be carefully circumscribed to limit collateral damage and avert an inexorable lurch into war.
The Ball is in Iran’s Court
As the Iranian people awoke to see their capital largely spared the harrowing destruction visited on some cities in Ukraine, there was wary relief mixed with apprehension over what comes next. In Tehran’s corridors of power, the question of the hour is whether Iran will repay Israel’s salvo with restraint or reprisal. Either way, the reverberations from its choice will be felt across the Middle East and beyond.
The ball, as so often before, is once again in Iran’s court. The world is watching anxiously to see if the region’s most pivotal feud will careen into ruinous conflict or pull back from the brink yet again. For the Iranian leadership, the stakes could not be higher as it ponders a fateful decision that may not only seal its own future, but shape the Middle East for years to come.
