1 month ago
7
Iran vowed to take revenge over the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr, leaving West Asia on edge. But there has been no attack yet. As Tehran weighs its options, experts suggest that the delay is part of a strategic calculation to avoid all-out war while preparing a response that is symbolic and significant read more
 "What is behind the delayed attack?")
A banner with a picture of late Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh is displayed next to the Iran and Palestinian flags in a street in Tehran, Iran, August 12, 2024. File Image/Reuters
West Asia has recently been overshadowed by a tense standoff between Iran and Israel.
The assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, a top Hamas leader, during his visit to Tehran, has been a flashpoint in the ongoing hostilities between Iran and Israel. The attack, which occurred the day after an Israeli airstrike killed Fuad Shukr, a senior Hezbollah commander, in Beirut, was seen as a direct affront to Iran.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran will defend its territorial integrity, honour, pride and dignity, and make the terrorist invaders regret their cowardly action,” newly elected Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, whose inauguration Haniyeh was in Tehran to attend, had said in a post on X.
A statement from Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei read, “The criminal and terrorist Zionist regime martyred our dear guest in our house and made us sad, but it also prepared a harsh punishment for itself."
Watch:
But Iran’s vow of retaliation against Israel has not yet materialised, leading to widespread speculation and anxiety in the region.
Why has Iran not responded yet?
Despite the fiery rhetoric and the promise of severe consequences, Iran’s response has been notably absent. The delay has sparked intense debate among analysts and within the region about the factors contributing to Tehran’s apparent restraint.
One significant reason is the internal deliberation within Iran’s newly established government under Masoud Pezeshkian, whose administration is still in the process of forming its cabinet. The need to balance a show of strength with diplomatic and economic considerations - such as the potential for sanctions relief - has likely contributed to the cautious approach.
Moreover, Iranian officials are keenly aware of the risks associated with a hasty military response. A symbolic or limited strike could embolden Israel to continue its aggressive tactics, while a more substantive attack might trigger an all-out war that Iran is not prepared to manage.
A response that avoids closing the door on negotiations with the West will be a delicate balancing act which is further complicated by the psychological aspect of the situation, as noted by Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah, who suggested that the delay is part of a strategy to keep Israel on edge and maximise global attention.
Iran’s commitment to retaliation stems from its role as a key supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah, groups that are integral to its broader strategy of regional influence. Allowing such an assassination to go unanswered would not only undermine Iran’s credibility but also signal a potential weakening of its deterrence capabilities.
How could Iran respond?
Iran’s potential military responses are varied and could involve multiple fronts. Tehran’s extensive network of proxy forces - including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthi militia in Yemen - provides it with the capability to strike Israel from various directions.
In April, Iran launched around 300 missiles and drones in response to an Israeli strike on its embassy in Syria, most of which were intercepted by Israel’s advanced air defences. This was one of the most direct confrontations between the two nations, and while it resulted in only minor damage to an Israeli airbase and injured a civilian, it signalled a significant escalation in their ongoing shadow war.
A similar or even more aggressive response could be on the horizon, but Tehran is weighing its options carefully.
How have stakeholders reacted to Iran’s potential response?
The international community, particularly the United States and its allies, has been closely monitoring the situation, fearing that an escalation could spiral into a broader regional conflict. Diplomatic efforts to de-escalate tensions have been ongoing, with leaders from the US, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy urging Iran to stand down.
In response to the growing threat, the US has bolstered its military presence in the region, deploying additional combat aircraft, warships, and a guided-missile submarine. US Defence Secretary Lloyd J Austin stated that these measures are intended to support Israel and deter any potential aggression from Iran.
Simultaneously, efforts to broker a ceasefire in Gaza continue, with the Biden administration and Arab mediators planning talks aimed at reducing hostilities. Iran’s participation in these talks, albeit indirectly, suggests that Tehran is still considering diplomatic avenues to resolve the crisis.
However, as the situation drags on, the risk of a sudden and severe escalation looms large. White House spokesperson John Kirby warned that “something could happen as soon as this week by Iran and its proxies,” indicating that the window for diplomacy may be closing rapidly.
Also Read | Iran to hold back Israel retaliation for Haniyeh killing if Gaza talks end in ceasefire: Report
With inputs from agencies
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
English (US) ·