Officials in the America-led coalition supporting Israel have reportedly warned Jerusalem not to respond too harshly to an Iranian attack to avoid sparking a regional war.
Netanyahu claimed on Sunday that, “anyone who hurts us will pay a very heavy price.”
“Our readiness in terms of defence is high – be it on the ground or in the air,” the prime minister said.
Options to strike back against the Islamic Republic range from a limited attack against proxy militias in the wider region to direct bombing raids against Tehran’s nuclear facilities.
Former Israeli intelligence official Avi Melamed, who served as an advisor to Ehud Olmert, said that any Israeli response would be in proportion to Iran’s strike.
An attack last month against Yemen’s Hodeida port city in response to a drone attack against Tel Aviv showcased the destruction Israel was able to unleash, he claimed.
Melamed said: “Any significant Iranian strike on Israel will likely be met with a response of a similar scale in a show of shock and awe against Iran and its hegemonic vision.
“Israeli leaders have already touted their strategic target lists over the last couple of days both in preemptive strikes in Syria and Lebanon, but also in messaging that Israel is planning for a dynamic and rapid pivot from defence to offence.
“Ultimately, it’s not a question of if, how, or when, but rather the scope and impact of the Iranian response that will dictate the next phase in the conflict in the Middle East.
“If Iran’s attack is thwarted or Israel and the US led coalition are able to intercept the Iranian response, it’s likely any Israeli counterstrike will be limited and muted in scale. If Iran’s attack is large and successful, Israel’s response will likely be to bring similar destruction to the Iranian homeland and any area controlled by its proxies throughout the region.”
Speaking to Iran International, former CIA Director General Petraeus also said that Israel’s response would depend on how destructive Iran’s attack was.
If the IRGC were to destroy critical infrastructure, he said, “Israel would have to respond in a very massive way, not unlike the way that they responded to the Houthi drone attack… and they did enormous damage to the port of Hodeidah in Yemen.”
Following the first, and to date only, direct Iranian attack against Israel, launched in April of this year, the IDF carried out airstrikes against the central Iranian city of Isfahan.
While limited in scale, the attack demonstrated Jerusalem’s ability, and willingness, to target a site that contains facilities for the country’s nuclear programme.
At the time, an unnamed Western security official told Arabic-language Elaph News that Israel had been conducting air force drills that included preparations to target nuclear sites.
Such facilities are typically buried deep underground and would be extremely difficult to penetrate, however. Were the the IDF to attack but fail to destroy such a site it could be a humilitating failure that would embolden Iran.
Alternatively, Israel could attack Iranian-backed fighters in Syria, Lebanon or Iraq, but such a limited response is likely to be seen as too weak by Israeli leaders.
A midpoint of the two options might be to attack a key military target such as a missile silo or naval base.
While this could lead to further escalation in the region, Netanyahu is thought to believe that he is operating with a freer hand after Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential race.
“[Biden] told him not to respond too harshly to Iran’s attacks. And Iran knew this, which is why they exploited the situation to attack Israel,” an American official told The Telegraph last week.
“His true agenda is to support Israel fully. And he has done so for decades. Netanyahu knows this, which is why he’s being more bold and feels confident that he can attack Israel’s enemies and still have the full support of the US.”
