Published :
Updated :
For all latest news, follow The Financial Express Google News channel.
Iran’s role in Gaza, particularly in radicalising the young generation against Israeli occupation, is known to all. Its opposition to the Zionist regime’s plan to stretch the state of Israel ‘from the river to the sea’ has kept the flame of freedom burning in the hearts of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation for over 70 years. The Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO; later becomes Palestine Authority or PA) leader Yasser Arafat was not very enthusiastic about a close relation with Iran apprehending this might jeopardise the support from the Arab countries. He avoided a meeting convened by Iran in 1991 in Tehran where leaders from the Hamas group and Islamic Jjhad attended. At that meeting, presided over by the Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran committed $35 million as annual assistance to Hamas. When the demise of PLA leader Yasser Arafat in 2004 left Palestinian leadership in the hands of leaders lacking in charisma and vision to enthuse the young generation, the Hamas group in Gaza gained in strength and popularity. This led to their victory in the election held in Gaza in 2006 after the withdrawal of Israeli army the previous year. As Western donors stopped aid to Gaza following the election results, the Hamas prime minister in Gaza Ismail Haniyeh visited Tehran and was promised an annual financial assistance of $250 million along with training of Hamas groups for underground war with Israel. It was at this time that the idea of a network of tunnels for movement of Hamas fighters and production of rockets and missiles was planned. Arms and ammunitions were brought to Gaza through these tunnels from Sudanese ports and entry points in Sinai peninsula. Before 7 October, 2023 Gaza had a network of 700 kilometres built with Iranian financial assistance, having living and storage facilities as well as production of rockets and missiles. Iranian military top brass like General Sulemani advised and collaborated with Hamas leaders in their preparation for underground war with Israel. Units like Al Quds brigade of Hamas were trained by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Lebanon and at various places in Iran. General Suleimani, killed in an US drone attack in Iraq, played a key role in arming and training Hamas and reshaping their strategy from suicide bombing attacks, widely employed during the second Intifada, towards an underground warfare strategy.
Given the close relation with and its almost total dependence on Iran, it was only natural for observers to think that the October 7 attack by Hamas in Israeli settlements and border security posts that resulted in the deaths of 1,319 Israelis including civilians and taking of hostage, numbering about 200, was planned and choreographed in details by Iran. Lauding the bravery in breaching the tight border security of Israel and success of Hamas militants in inflicting damages, including taking of hostages by Iranian authorities only confirmed that assumption. When Israel vowed revenge and started an all out war in Gaza, beginning with bombardments from land, air and sea, the Iranian Foreign minister visited Lebanon and the capitals of Arab countries to drum up support for Hamas. At the time it seemed that having encouraged Hamas to invade Israel, Iran was keen to come to their aid militarily if Arab countries were willing to build an alliance against Israel. But when it became apparent that Arab countries were not interested in getting involved in another war with Israel and preferred to use diplomatic channel to deal with the crisis, Iran gave up this path of face to face confrontation and opted for attacks by its proxy in southern Lebanon. As a result, a limited attack by Hezbollah from their stronghold in Lebanon began, opening a second front for Israel. Iran’s strategy reflected in this move was to tie down Israeli defensive and offensive capabilities in a manner that would limit its military operations in Gaza and thus take off some pressure from beleaguered Hamas in Gaza.
As the Israeli war machine ruthlessly pursued its goal of annihilating Hamas and its infrastructures in Gaza, the civilian death toll rose alarmingly, causing concerns in Western countries that had earlier publicly declared their support for Israel’s ‘ right to self defence’, a policy that encouraged Israel to continue its genocidal attacks in Gaza. Meanwhile, Israel responded to surgical attacks by Hezbollah by targeted attacks on Iranian positions in Syria and Iraq that destroyed air defence systems and missile sites. But the targeted attacks also killed some top ranking leaders of Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon. Iran, though provoked, remained silent at the sporadic destruction of assets and killings of leaders of its proxies and sometimes its own Revolutionary Guard members posted in Syria and Iraq. It was apparent that Israel was trying to ensnare Iran in a trap where it would be easy pickings for its defence forces, aided by America. The placement of American warships, including aircraft carriers in eastern Mediterranean may have emboldened Israel to engage in provocative acts to drag in Iran into a war. In fact, Israel had been itching for a war against Iran with American support ever since the latter began a nuclear project for power generation. Iran refused to take the bait and settled for actions by its proxies in Lebanon and in neighbouring countries.
Undeterred by the quiet stance of Iran, Israel made a surprise drone attack on April 1, 2024, on Iranian consulate in Damascus that killed eleven members of Revolutionary Guards, including top commanders. Iran, infuriated, considered this as crossing the red line by Israel. Firstly, the attack on its consulate was a violation of its sovereignty in as much as the consulate is a part of Iranian territory. Secondly, for the first time Israel killed top commanders of Revolutionary Guards, close allies of the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei no less. As expected, Iran fumed and ranted promising retribution with fire and brimstone. But first, it took the diplomatic path of tabling a resolution in the Security Council, asking for condemnation of Israel for its violation of Iran’s sovereignty. As usual, America and its allies refused to condemn Israel. This left Iran with no alternative but to take a tit for tat attack on Israel. The most commonly held view was that Iran might attack an Israeli diplomatic mission in a country of its own choosing. Diplomatic pressure was brought to bear on Iran by the allies of Israel not to retaliate as it would escalate the war in Gaza, engulfing the whole of Middle East. But having been humiliated and wronged by the attack on its consulate in Damascus that went without a condemnation by the West, Iran had to take some kind of action to save its face internationally. Besides, it also had to satisfy the domestic constituency that called for a fitting reply to Israeli aggression. Iranian leadership, though wary of an escalating war that it might have to fight alone against Israel and its ally America, was faced with the inevitability of striking Israel on its territory. To assure America that it would be a token military response that will avoid civilian casualties advance notice was given by Iran so that Israel had enough time to take defensive measures to minimise damage. It was a very sound and safe approach that promised to salvage Iran’s wounded prestige and at the same time not inflict such damages on Israel as would prompt it to take retaliatory measures. Accordingly, America alerted Israel and asked its allies to come to the aid of Israel in the event of an attack, all the while intoning the mantra ‘don’t escalate ‘ to Iran.
As declared and duly informed, Iran retaliated with a barrage of drone and missile attack that surprised everyone by its range, number and precision. A total o 320 projectiles were sent to attack military targets in Israel, comprising 250 drones and a mix of ballistic and cruise missiles. Besides the air defence system of Israel, most of the incoming projectiles were intercepted and destroyed by missiles used by America, British, French and Jordanian air defence system. Only a few of the projectiles hit their targets causing minor damages and no deaths.
Predictably, every participant in this ‘mock attack’ claimed victory. But Israel vowed to take revenge nevertheless, with retaliation at a time and target chosen by it. Apprehending a spiralling of war in the Middle East, America and its allies put maximum pressure on Israel to use restraint. But Israel had the same compulsion as Iran to take revenge and attack Iran. Finally, America declared that Israel was going to retaliate but in a limited way so that Iran does not feel compelled to repeat the tit for tat action. Persuading the gung ho Israeli military establishment to rein in its firepower has been the best piece of diplomatic initiatives made by America so far in the six-month old conflict in the Middle East. It put paid to the impression that Biden Administration is keen to take on Iran along with Israel and destroy its nuclear facilities.
As a result of all the back channel diplomatic manoeuvres, the Israeli retaliation on April 14 against targets in Isfahan was even more limited than that by the Iranians, leaving both parties to gloat ‘victory’. Observers and analysts waited with baited breath if Israel would avail of this opportunity to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities and thereby provoke Iran to retaliate on a scale to overwhelm Israeli air defence. This would trigger an all out war in the Middle East dragging other countries including America. Thanks to the pressure exerted by America and its allies, this risk was averted. This has been the only instance of a discreet and impartial move made by America and its allies in defusing a highly explosive situation
An all out war between Iran and Israel would have relegated the humanitarian crisis in Gaza to the back burner, resulting in more deaths in the war of attrition resorted to by Israel. It would also have postponed any political process leading to the two-state solution in Palestine. Having paid such a heavy price in blood, sweat and tears, the Palestinians deserve a homeland of their own where they can live in peace and with dignity. The Israelis do not like the idea but their allies, including America and its allies are convinced of its necessity to a degree that was not seen before. Iran should not take any false step that might give Israel the excuse and chance to scuttle the plan for two-state solution. This is the best possible gift they can arrange to offer to the long suffering people of Palestine. The grand plan of driving out Israelis from Palestine that they cherish is a pipe dream given the ground reality. On the other hand, the two-state solution is rewarding enough for both the Palestinians and their well wishers, including Iran to bury the hatchet against Israel. Iran had taken up the cause of the Palestinians when the Arabs abandoned them in pursuit of their selfish interests. Now after all these years of struggle, bloodshed and humiliation there is a flicker of light at the end of the tunnel. Iran should use self restraint and patience to allow this hope to become a reality. After all, they single-handedly helped Hamas to build the tunnels to freedom. They should now let them be blessed with the ‘ light’ at the end of the tunnel.