Escalation ladder: On conflict between Israel and Iran
Iran should show strategic restraint; and the world should rein in Israel
There is no parity between Israel and Iran when it comes to conventional military capabilities. Israel, the only nuclear power in West Asia, has U.S. protection and supplies. The Israeli Defense Forces fly the F-35, one of the world’s most advanced fighter jets, and have a multi-layered defensive shield. Iran is practically on its own. It has been under U.S. sanctions for decades. Its closest partners, Russia and China, have no appetite to get involved. Its axis of resistance, including Hamas and Hezbollah, is under fire. So, Israel clearly has an edge in long-distance warfare. Yet, Iran showed a greater risk appetite this year than in the past with two direct attacks on Israel. Its militias may be under attack but are not out, and can continue to bleed Israel by a thousand cuts. And in the event of an all-out war, Iran can weaponise the critical arteries of energy trade in the Gulf, plunging the world economy into darkness. Such an outcome is in nobody’s interest, which also explains why the U.S. dissuaded Israel from targeting Iran’s critical infrastructure. Iran might be tempted to retaliate, but that would only prolong the cycle of violence, taking the region a step closer to an all-out war. Instead, Iran, in the larger interests of itself and the region, should show strategic restraint. But one side’s restraint alone does not bring peace. It was Israel that took the war to Iran by attacking the Iranian embassy in Damascus on April 1 this year. For stability in West Asia, both sides should stay away from directly targeting each other.