Iran’s promised retaliation to the Israeli airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus came in the early hours of Sunday morning. Swarms of attack drones and cruise and ballistic missiles were deployed in an unprecedented direct attack from Iran. Most of the drones and missiles were neutralised by Israel and its allies. However, a few ballistic missiles penetrated Israel’s formidable Iron Dome and struck the Nevatim and Ramon airbase in the southern Negev desert and a radar station in the north. Damage to infrastructure was minimal and no deaths were reported.
The situation in the Middle East remained tense. The ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict has raged for over six months in Gaza and the West Bank. The leadership of both Israel and Hamas face growing opposition from their own people, but both have persisted with the conflict. Attempts by the international community to get the two sides to de-escalate and seek peace have borne no fruit.
There is fresh concern about a potential Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear sites or high-value targets. The same is true of cyberattacks. Any attack carries the potential for further turmoil and instability.
The direct strikes between Israel and Iran bring a new dimension to conflict in the region. Although the two have for long been in confrontation and have waged attacks on each other through militia in foreign lands or covert operations, the current escalation has wider ramifications.
The deliberate airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus was audacious in terms of international and diplomatic conventions. The Iranian Supreme Leader called it a direct attack on Iran and declared that Israel would be punished. The attack became a public and emotive issue, not just in Iran, but in the Arab world, and the Iranians used it as casus belli for retaliation.
While the Iranian response promised retaliation, they signalled to the US that American assets could be kept out of harm’s way. The direct attack was overwhelming in sheer volume and tested the capability of Israel’s air defence systems, but its prior announcement also gave Israel and its allies time to take countermeasures. Iran indicated it has achieved its objectives. However, both attacks crossed the Rubicon.
If Israel’s objective was to widen the conflict, it had partial success as it provoked Iran’s direct retaliation and also obtained the support of its allies and neighbours to engage in neutralising the Iranian attack. However, allies stressed they did not support any subsequent Israeli response and noted they would not join such a venture.
The US declared victory as the Iranian attack was effectively repulsed and damage was minimal. Most Western countries condemned the Iranian attack and called for de-escalation. At the UN Security Council, where Israel and Iran sparred over the incident, there was little appetite for expanding the conflict.
Iran’s supporters in the region voiced support and Iran-supported militia in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen launched rocket and drone attacks on Israel. Arab countries were cautious as they did not wish for escalation. But they do not want Iran to become the representative of sentiments on the Arab street either. Iran signalled that its exercise has been concluded. However, an Israeli counterattack could complicate the issue, especially as Iran’s deterrence capability may be less and damages could lead to an escalation of conflict.
The long history of animosity and confrontation between the sides has now erupted in direct attacks. Israel is believed to be nuclear-capable and Iran’s desired programmes for nuclear capability have been in the spotlight. A nuclear flashpoint needs to be avoided.
Certain scholars believe that the success of an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would be uncertain, but the risks would be enormous. They note that Iran may accelerate preparations for realising its nuclear ambitions. However, it has also been argued that the countervailing power that Iran may possess in anticipation of acquiring nuclear capability may exceed what it may gain by actually attaining the status.
The focus on the Israel-Palestine conflict did not recede in the run-up to the anticipated Iranian retaliation.
The Mossad-Hamas channel — brokered by Egypt — to negotiate a ceasefire and release of hostages saw limited progress in the sessions last week. Neither Israel nor Hamas seemed keen to push hard enough for an end to their war.
Conflict does not augur well for regional peace, stability, economic growth and development. Israel, as a major economic and technological power, stands to lose much in a prolonged war. Many Arab countries, who sought a brighter future in closer cooperation with Israel, also wish to see the end of the conflict.
Iran’s economy has been under stress for some time now and it can hardly afford a full-fledged war. Conflict in the region also affects others across the world, not merely in terms of increased oil prices, but also the weakening of supply chains.
For India, the region constitutes our extended neighbourhood. Stability is crucial for cooperation and development. Turmoil affects the security of the large Indian diaspora based in the Gulf region; there is the additional risk of piracy and hostage-taking. The Global South and global governance would also be impacted by continuing instability in the Middle East. It is imperative that the international community lean upon all parties such that they refrain from further violence and seek solutions through diplomatic negotiations.
The two-state solution is the only way ahead for long-term security, peace and stability. It is not an easy goal, but both sides are familiar with the challenges and opportunities. The cycle of violence must end and the rights and aspirations of the people must be met. India’s civilisational contacts and credentials make her an ideal friend to all in the region.
The writer is a former Ambassador and Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs
I met nobody in rural India who saw Modi asSubscriber Only
How Bengaluru’s lakes disappearedSubscriber Only
Express Interview with Vidya Balan & Pratik GandhiSubscriber Only
To survive as an artist today, be a megalomaniacSubscriber Only
How FN Souza's art was perplexing yet arrestingSubscriber Only
Lakshya Sen & Priyanshu Rajawat hold the key to India'sSubscriber Only
Why Shobhaa De says hunger is underrated
‘High growth not possible if we don’t do our ownSubscriber Only
Buoyed by Modi factor, Tejasvi Surya sits pretty in BangaloreSubscriber Only
Turmoil affects the security of large Indian diaspora based in Gulf region and there is additional risk of piracy and hostage-taking
20
1
22.04.2024
Iran’s promised retaliation to the Israeli airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus came in the early hours of Sunday morning. Swarms of attack drones and cruise and ballistic missiles were deployed in an unprecedented direct attack from Iran. Most of the drones and missiles were neutralised by Israel and its allies. However, a few ballistic missiles penetrated Israel’s formidable Iron Dome and struck the Nevatim and Ramon airbase in the southern Negev desert and a radar station in the north. Damage to infrastructure was minimal and no deaths were reported.
The situation in the Middle East remained tense. The ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict has raged for over six months in Gaza and the West Bank. The leadership of both Israel and Hamas face growing opposition from their own people, but both have persisted with the conflict. Attempts by the international community to get the two sides to de-escalate and seek peace have borne no fruit.
There is fresh concern about a potential Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear sites or high-value targets. The same is true of cyberattacks. Any attack carries the potential for further turmoil and instability.
The direct strikes between Israel and Iran bring a new dimension to conflict in the region. Although the two have for long been in confrontation and have waged attacks on each other through militia in foreign lands or covert operations, the current escalation has wider ramifications.
The deliberate airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus was audacious in terms of international and diplomatic conventions. The Iranian Supreme Leader called it a direct attack on Iran and declared that Israel would be punished.........
© Indian Express
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
