
Why Jordan and Egypt Are Critical to Trump’s Gaza Proposal
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT – On Tuesday, with Jordan’s King Abdullah II at his side, President Donald Trump exuded confidence that the Arab world will […] More
EXPERT Q&A — Iran’s missile barrage against Israel may have done little damage, but its aftermath may bring a major escalation in a region already brimming with tension and conflict. Iran said Tuesday’s strikes were carried out in response to Israel’s wars on Hamas and Hezbollah, specifically the assassinations of top leaders of Iran-backed militia groups including Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. In a highly volatile moment, the attacks and Israel’s vow to strike back raise profound questions for the Middle East. Assuming Israel does respond, what might that retaliation entail? Would a much-feared wider wider regional war follow? And how might that unfold?
The Cipher Brief asked Norman Roule, former National Intelligence Manager for Iran at ODNI, for his response to the attack and what he believe may lie ahead.
These answers have been edited for length and clarity.
The Cipher Brief: What did the Iranian attack tell us about Iran and its proxies?
Roule: It is important to note what we saw and didn’t see in the attack.
First, we saw that in an effort to avoid a repeat of its poor military performance in April, Iran’s military chose an attack plan that involved a no-notice saturation ballistic missile strike on the key Israeli military installations involved in operations against Hamas and Hezbollah. Tehran’s generals likely calculated that this strike plan would deny Israel and its defenders the time to build an effective defense and that a saturation strike would raise the chances of inflicting damage. The attack was large, perhaps the largest saturation attack by ballistic missiles in the region’s history. In the end, Israeli, U.S., and partners’ military skill and technology produced the same embarrassing defeat that Tehran received in April.
Next in priority would be what we didn’t see. Iran fought alone. Its proxies were unable to mount any serious coordinated strikes to complicate Israeli and U.S. defenses. Instead, we a saw only a small Hamas demonstration in Gaza, a few missiles from Hezbollah, a small number of strikes against the U.S. by Iraqi militias, and a single explosive boat attack by the Houthis against an oil tanker. One would be challenged to find a better illustration of the failure of Iran’s proxies as strategic offensive partners for Tehran.
The Cipher Brief: What did the Iranian attack tell us about the US and Israel?
Roule: Again, we are back to what we saw and didn’t see. First, we saw Israel, U.S., and partners defeat Iran’s assault with relative ease. The power of U.S. military technology and skill of our missiles, destroyers and air force must gnaw at our adversaries. U.S. intelligence support and an ability to integrate that intelligence with our partners also likely contributed to this success. We are now in an era where weapons of unprecedented power are being used throughout the region, but also in a time when such weaponry is proving ineffective against sophisticated defenders. This isn’t new, however. We should keep in mind the skill and effectiveness of the Saudis and Emiratis in defending their countries against Iranian-supplied missiles and drones.
But what didn’t happen was also instructive. Neither the U.S. nor Israel acted against Iranian missile launchers during the attack. Washington certainly had the offensive capacity in the region. Once more, in order to avoid the risk of war with Iran, we put all of our chips on defense. No one can argue with the need to avoid a war, but defense is not deterrence. Successful defense absent deterrence leaves an adversary to think about ways to overcome our defenses in the future. Or worse, it leaves an adversary convinced that they can attack – at a certain level – endlessly without paying a price. We have that situation with the Houthis and Israel faced this situation with Hezbollah until its recent attacks on that group.
The Cipher Brief: What happens next?
Roule: Israeli retaliation is highly likely. The Netanyahu government – along with Israel’s military and security forces – have worked hard to show that Israel will no longer allow itself to be targeted by Iran or its proxies. Israel likely already has targeting packages of key Iranian facilities it will strike. The selection of the targets will be the subject of deliberation – which may already have taken place – by Israel’s security cabinet. The targets are likely to be significant, more so than the S-300 air defense site Israel allegedly struck in April. Deliberation by the Israelis likely focused less on the targets and more on how to reset deterrence without igniting a war that would inevitably demand the political, economic, and military support — if not active participation by — the United States. Operations in Gaza and Lebanon must continue, and a war with Iran would leave Israel fighting in three arenas, for weeks if not months to come.
Washington is no doubt delighted the Iranian attack was so clearly defeated. It is unlikely the Biden administration believes it can restrain Israel from retaliation but probably believes it can shape that retaliation and hopefully avoid dealing with a major conflict in the final weeks of the Biden administration.
The Cipher Brief: What worries you?
Roule: The episode underscores two realities that are part of the new normal of the region. First, events keep telling us that a successful defense does not produce deterrence in the Middle East any more than it does with Russia against Ukraine. Western reliance on endless non-coercive diplomacy has left us with the weakest deterrence posture in the Middle East – and perhaps elsewhere – in decades. This leaves the initiative for events in the hands of aggressors. Second, the idea of “red lines” no longer seems to exist in the region. This is also a result of weak diplomacy. By allowing so many red lines to be crossed – from missile attacks on partners to direct threats against U.S. persons in the Homeland – it is difficult to say what red lines actually exist in global affairs. Adversaries successfully test red lines without consequences. It is hard not to believe that we will one day wake up to find a red line has been crossed in a way that can’t be ignored. This could easily bring about the automaticity that ignites the war that we work so hard to avoid.
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals.
Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to [email protected] for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
Related Articles
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT – On Tuesday, with Jordan’s King Abdullah II at his side, President Donald Trump exuded confidence that the Arab world will […] More
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT – As President Donald Trump doubles down on his idea of a U.S. takeover of Gaza, Arab governments are also doubling […] More
As the second Trump Administration took office, it found a Middle East landscape that had been transformed dramatically in the last year alone. Nowhere is […] More
EXPERT INTERVIEW / PERSPECTIVE – The Middle East has changed dramatically over the past four years, creating both extraordinary challenges and opportunities for the region […] More
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT — Might a Gaza peace agreement bring benefit beyond the besieged Gaza Strip? That’s the tantalizing hope expressed by several U.S. officials […] More
EXPERT INTERVIEWS — The final days of the Biden Administration are coinciding with an all-out push to reach a ceasefire-for-hostage deal in Gaza. And in a […] More
Search