Iran's supreme leader and government are facing what many consider an existential moment as they try to decide how to respond to Israeli attacks on Iran's military hierarchy, air defenses and nuclear program.
Iran launched a counterattack late last night by firing missiles at Israeli territory. The Israeli military said Iran fired fewer than 100 missiles and that most were intercepted or fell before reaching their targets, Reuters reported. The U.S. military helped shoot down Iranian missiles that were aimed at Israel, two U.S. officials said.
In addition to military coups, Tehran has a number of other options at its disposal, each of which carries serious risks.
The New York Times writes that limiting or abandoning the nuclear program would appear to be an act of surrender, further weakening support for the regime. On the other hand, a more aggressive response, including possible attacks on American targets, would almost certainly escalate the conflict at a time when Iran's military capabilities are seriously impaired.
The all-out Israeli attacks have further highlighted Iran's most difficult position in decades, according to the Times. The Islamic Republic appears helpless in the face of Israeli strikes. Its proxy forces, such as Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, which were supposed to serve as a buffer, have been decimated, its economy is in deep crisis, top military commanders have been assassinated, and the question of the successor to the aging supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is also uncertain.
US President Donald Trump, who has been pressuring Iran for months to agree to curb its nuclear program, has seen the Israeli attacks as a warning, but also as an incentive for Iran to "make a deal before there's nothing left." He said yesterday: "Now they have, maybe, a second chance!"
Trump told Reuters yesterday that it was unclear whether Iran still had a nuclear program after the Israeli strikes, but experts say the damage to the country's nuclear facilities appears limited for now.
The Israeli strikes have succeeded in eliminating Iranian military leaders and nuclear scientists, as well as hitting military command and control centers and air defenses, but satellite imagery so far shows no significant damage to nuclear infrastructure, several experts told Reuters.
Iran is likely to view Israel's latest strikes "as a direct attempt to destabilize the regime, not just as an effort to curb its nuclear ambitions," said Ali Vaez, director of the Iran program at the International Crisis Group. "Therefore, the regime could interpret it as an existential threat - one that requires a strong and potentially explosive response."
Even if Iran now decides to be cautious and not attack American targets and allies in the region, there is little doubt that in the minds of its leaders the United States is complicit in the Israeli attacks, said Vali Nasr, a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. However, attacking American targets now would be the surest way not only to escalate the war, but also to give Trump a reason to openly support Israel in its attacks on Iran, the Times points out.
Given the scale of the Israeli attack, Iran is likely to view the strike "as a direct attempt to destabilize the regime, not just as an effort to curb its nuclear ambitions."
US and Israeli officials are demanding that Iran completely halt its uranium enrichment program, one of two routes to producing nuclear weapons. Iran officially denies it has any intention of building a bomb and says enrichment is for civilian purposes only.
“They will not give up enrichment so easily,” Nasr said. “They will not surrender.” Iran announced on state television yesterday that it would not attend a previously scheduled sixth round of talks with the Americans tomorrow in Oman on a possible nuclear deal. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sharply criticized those talks and appears to be trying to sabotage them with these attacks.
From the Iranian perspective, Netanyahu is not only trying to militarily and symbolically weaken and damage the Islamic Republic, but is also “trying to provoke an internal crisis in Iran,” said Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House. But as before, she expects “the system, albeit weaker, to unite around the flag.”
The regime could be threatened at some point. “But from which side?” Nasr says. What could replace the Islamic Republic might not be democracy, but “could strengthen the influence of hardliners,” he says.
The Times estimates that Iran's weakness will certainly accelerate the already existing debate within the top brass about whether to finally build nuclear weapons, despite earlier promises not to do so, as the best deterrent against Israel, which can now freely bomb Iran and, more broadly, ensure its own security.
"Many people in Iran will feel like they are backed up against a wall, that regional deterrence has failed, that negotiations have yielded no results, that Israel is rampant, and that the only real protection is nuclear weapons," said Julien Barnes-Dacey of the European Council on Foreign Relations.
Iran could decide to step up uranium enrichment, move its stockpile of highly enriched uranium to secret locations, expel international inspectors and withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty altogether, the New York Times reports. Israel is not a signatory to the treaty and has a policy of neither confirming nor denying such a program. However, such moves could lead to more direct US involvement in the war.
Iran has so far been careful not to attack other US allies, Gulf states or their energy infrastructure, seeking to avoid widening the conflict. Its leaders are likely in contact with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, which have access to and influence over Trump, to try to find a way to save face and “get things under control,” especially after they hit back strongly at Israel, said Eli Geranmayeh, an Iran expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations.
However, as the Times reports, Ayatollah Khamenei has never trusted the United States or Trump, especially since the president unilaterally withdrew from the carefully crafted 2015 nuclear deal during his first term, which limited Iran's uranium enrichment in exchange for the lifting of economic and other sanctions, and then imposed more sanctions.
If Ayatollah Khamenei thought that negotiations with the Americans would protect Iran from Israeli attacks, he will now wonder whether even a deal with Trump would prevent Israel from attacking Iran, Geranmayeh said.
“Khamenei is in a very difficult situation now,” she said. “Iran could end up winning a bigger war and then a very unfavorable peace deal.” She added that Khamenei would face increasing pressure from the military and hardliners to now use Iran's best resources against Israel.
Tehran always has options, said Susan Maloney, an Iran expert and director of the Foreign Policy Program at the Brookings Institution. Iran can not only launch missiles, but also conduct cyberattacks, engage its proxy militant groups or even expand its nuclear program, moving closer to the rapid development of a nuclear bomb.
"But all of these options have consequences that could put the regime in even greater danger," she said. She added that, given the deep infiltration of Israeli intelligence into Iran, "one has to wonder what else could befall them."
Bonus video:
