Israel’s retaliation, when it came, was surprisingly limited. Iran minimised the significance of Friday’s air attacks on a military base near Isfahan and other targets, denying they were externally directed. Usually voluble Israeli spokesmen fell strangely silent. It was as if a tacit bilateral agreement had been made to play down the affair – to quietly de-escalate.
Like surreptitious 19th-century duellists illicitly pointing pistols at each other across a misty English meadow at dawn, both countries required that honour be satisfied – but wanted to avoid another noisy public row. Each has fired directly at the other, causing symbolic damage. Now they and their seconds are signalling it’s over – at least for the time being.
If true, it’s a huge, though possibly temporary, relief. It suggests that intense US pressure on Israel to exercise restraint, abetted by Britain and others, paid off. President Joe Biden had urged Israel to “take the win” after Iran’s unprecedented, large-scale air attack last weekend was successfully repulsed. Its leaders didn’t wholly concur.
It is not in Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s DNA to turn the other cheek. A former commando, he instinctively resorts to force. And he was urged by hard-right allies to “go berserk”. In the event, his measured response reflects enhanced US leverage. Crucial US assistance in defending Israel last weekend could not be ignored.
It would be foolish to assume this is the end of the matter. Visceral hostility, political and ideological, still separates the two enemies. Both governments are beset by internal divisions that feed unpredictability and provocation. And a grim precedent has been struck. A Pandora’s box of head-to-head, one-on-one confrontation has sprung open.
The years-long shadow war waged by the two countries has been exposed to plain daylight, for all to see. Iran could strike back afresh at any time, directly or indirectly. Israel, which showed on Friday that it can hit Iran’s nuclear facilities if it chooses, could decide to go again, and more often. Next time may be much worse.
This Israel-Iran standoff is inextricably intertwined with the Palestinian conflict – to the benefit of neither. And the west’s dilemma appears even starker than before. David Cameron, Britain’s foreign secretary, typifies its one-sided, two-faced approach. He has pushed hard on aid for Gaza and, belatedly, for a ceasefire – but with scant success.
One reason for that failure may be the unwillingness of Rishi Sunak’s government to leverage UK arms sales to Israel. Another reason is Cameron’s refusal to condemn the unacknowledged 1 April Israeli air strike on Iran’s diplomatic compound in Damascus, which killed senior commanders and triggered Tehran’s attack last weekend.
UN experts say the strike broke international law. Cameron admitted last week that if a UK consulate were similarly attacked, Britain would make a “strong response”. But he just could not bring himself to say Israel was in the wrong. This pro-Israel default position characterises the attitude of many western governments.
When assessed more widely in terms of winners and losers, there is no doubt where last week’s events leave Ukrainians. They are furious about another indigestible slice of western hypocrisy. For over two years, Kyiv has pleaded in vain for Nato air cover and adequate missile defences. Yet what happened when Israel faced an Iranian barrage?
Mealy-mouthed blather about the dangers of escalation was suddenly forgotten. The US, Britain, France and others piled in, scrambling combat aircraft to complement state-of-the-art missile defences. While Israel emerged almost unscathed, officials say inadequately protected Ukraine faces a similar number of drone and missile attacks – about 300 – every week.
Likewise, besieged Palestinians have watched in dismay as western criticism of Netanyahu morphed overnight, thanks to Iran, into a jarring solidarity chorus. Aid agencies continue to warn of imminent famine. About 34,000 Palestinians have died at Israeli hands in six months. The delayed offensive against Rafah looms. There are no winners in Gaza and the West Bank, only losers.
Iran claimed to have successfully punished Israel for the Damascus consulate bombing. In fact, its attack was a debacle that exposed its military limitations. Increased ostracism and additional sanctions are the instant payback. And Iran has certainly done no favours to the Palestinians, not that its leaders really care that much.
Yet Israelis have scant reason to celebrate, either. For sure, Israel repulsed Iran – this time – and has exacted a price. But its famed deterrence policy is in pieces. The myth of impregnable Fortress Israel has shattered. Meanwhile, more than 130 hostages remain in Gaza, Hamas is undefeated, and hawkish Netanyahu’s poll ratings are rising.
As for Biden, he finally got something right after mishandling the crisis that erupted on 7 October, when Hamas terrorists killed 1,200 Israelis. But it’s far from over. Iran further complicates Biden’s overall Middle East conundrum, which is costing him progressive votes. Politically, he cannot distance himself from Israel. But Netanyahu’s leadership is dangerous and toxic – an electoral millstone that could crush Biden.
The Middle East as a whole dodged a bullet last week. So far, the predicted region-wide conflagration has not ignited. On the other hand, several serious global emergencies are suffering worsening, contingent neglect. One is war-torn Sudan, where tens of millions require urgent humanitarian assistance. Others are Haiti, Somalia and Myanmar.
This is a powerful argument, among many, for resolving the Middle East’s core issue – the Israel-Palestine conflict. It absorbs too much diplomatic time, energy and resources. It spreads poison through the international system. It skewers and unbalances western policy. It empowers and elevates rogue actors – such as Iran.
In an interconnected world, the myopic opposition of most Israelis to an independent Palestinian state is everyone’s problem. Israel’s blind spot blinds all. Iran’s aggression, and what may yet ensue, should be an eye-opener.
• Simon Tisdall is the Observer’s foreign affairs commentator
