The Iran-Israel War: A Shadow Conflict Igniting into a Firestorm

In the early hours of June 13, the regional Cold War between Iran and Israel finally erupted into an open conflict. Israel launched a massive preemptive aerial campaign, striking deep into Iranian territory. Explosions rocked multiple Iranian cities, including Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz, Kerman Shah, and Hamadan, targeting military installations, air defense systems, missile storage sites, and nuclear facilities. Among the high-profile targets were the Natanz nuclear enrichment plant, the Arak heavy water reactor, and the Parchin military complex. Israeli jets roamed Iranian skies almost uncontested, Mossad operatives have also executed drone and guided missile strikes, and car bomb attacks within Iran’s heartland. These series of attacks have killed dozens of senior military commanders and nuclear scientists. The complexity, scale, reach, and synergy of Israel’s attacks suggests that this entire campaign was planned in good detail well ahead of its time as a final card to neutralize Iranian nuclear program and topple the current regime in Tehran. Israel’s “Operation Rising Lion,” seemingly also pays homage to the pre-revolution Iranian flag and is likely to continue for multiple days or even weeks.

Iran has retaliated with a series of ballistic missile and suicide drone strikes against Israel. Although 90 percent of Iranian attacks have been intercepted by Israel’s layered air defense systems. But, more than four dozen missiles have successfully struck Israel key cities, including Tel Aviv, Haifa, Rehovot, Bnei Brak, Petah Tikva, and Tmara. The scale of the air strikes and missile attacks dwarfs anything Israel and Iran have faced in recent decades. Israel has been dealing with rocket and missile threats from Hamas, Hezbollah from Lebanon, and even Houthis from Yemen. But Iranian missile attacks, although reduced significantly in magnitude due to Israel’s air strikes, are gradually overwhelming Israeli multi-layer defenses. Similarly, for Iran, such massive and well-coordinated precise air strikes have rendered its air-defenses useless, thus making almost every asset within Iranian territory vulnerable to Israeli precision strike.

Yet, despite the initial show of strength, both sides now face stark strategic dilemmas. Israel’s stockpile of interceptor missiles is rapidly depleting. It cannot replenish its stocks in such short time. To dilute Iranian missile strikes, Israel Air Force (IAF) has increased the targeting of Iranian missile launchers within Iran and claims to have destroyed two-third of launchers. In parallel, Israel has started to target the economic and urban infrastructure within Iran. The objective of this punishing strategy is to generate fear within Iranian public and undermine their confidence from ruling regime. This will eventually contribute in dissolution of contemporary rule, thus creating space for establishment of a new pro-Israel regime within Tehran.

Similarly, Iran missile arsenal has also decreased substantially. It still has thousands of missiles in its disposal, but it cannot afford to expand all its long-range weapons against Israel as threat of U.S. intervention is still looming overhead and likelihood of long war cannot be ruled out at all. Still, by breaching Israel’s multi-layer missile defenses, Tehran has created panic and chaos within Israel. By generating domestic political pressure in Israel, Tehran wants to catalyze a vote of no confidence against Netanyahu regime. However, this strategy, like Israel’s, is a gamble. Sustained Iranian missile attacks risk inviting even potentially American retaliation.

The United States, for now, is not directly involved—but that could change in coming days. On June 16, at least 30 U.S. tanker aircrafts took off from mainland and landed at forward operating locations in Europe, i.e., in Germany, Spain, and Italy, that typically serve Middle East missions. This unprecedented airlift is capable of supporting over 200 combat aircraft simultaneously, hinting at preparations for a large-scale air campaign. The USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group, which had been in the South China Sea, also abruptly canceled its port call in Vietnam. The Carrie Strike Group, comprising of nuclear powered air-craft carrier armed with fighter crafts, air-borne early warning aircrafts (AEWCs), and surface warships equipped with long-range cruise missiles and multi-layer surface to air missiles (SAM) system, is now rushing toward the Middle East. Such maneuvers suggest that Washington is either preparing to strike Iran directly or to support Israeli aircraft with in-flight refueling, allowing them to carry heavier payloads in follow-up waves.

In kinetic domain, besides providing defensive shield to Israeli mainland, replenishing IAF fighter aircrafts in air, there is another crucial task Netanyahu expects U.S. will undertake, i.e., destruction of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure located deeply underground. With Iran’s primary nuclear enrichment site at Fordow buried deep inside a mountain and likely beyond the reach of Israeli munitions, and a new ultra-fortified facility near Natanz—dubbed “Pickaxe Mountain”—being constructed, Israel’s ambitions to fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear capability are likely unachievable without direct U.S. involvement. Only the U.S. Air Force has the platforms, i.e., B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, and bunker-buster weapon i.e., the 13,000-kg GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), capable of reaching these deeply buried facilities. If U.S. will not provide this support, then Israel will be forced to use special-forces within Iran to breach and destroy these installations which is a very risky endeavor with little possibility for success. If U.S. resort to the use of MOP through B-2 bomber, then it’s likely to yield ramifications which will be felt on global scale.

Ever since the collapse of so called “axis of resistance” against Israel, Iran has been on back foot. While IAF is dominating the Iranian air-space, there are limited options left in Iranian disposal to response to potential direct intervention by U.S. Perhaps most feasible option for Iran would be to escalate the conflict horizontally and impose blockade at Strait of Hormuz. But this will yield global ramifications considering the significance of that sea channel for global energy markets. Similarly, option of striking U.S. military bases in Gulf can also backfire as it will grant Arab nations the justification to openly oppose Iran and support U.S. war fighting efforts. On flip side, Israel’s own credibility has been compromised. From its brutal war crimes in Gaza, to open military intervention in Lebanon, to its covert proxy warfare in Syria, Israel has drawn widespread international condemnation for blatant human rights violations and disregard for sovereignty of neighboring states. Particularly Netanyahu regime is now viewed as an aggressor regime that operates with impunity under the shield of U.S. support. Ultimately, both Israel and Iran are operating on razor-thin margins. As each strike and counterstrike take place, the path to de-escalation narrows down.

The ongoing Iran-Israel war which began as a preemptive Israeli campaign has now escalated into a high-stakes regional conflagration, with both Tehran and Tel Aviv absorbing and delivering punishing blows. As missile salvos and airstrikes continue to devastate cities and critical infrastructure on both sides, the risks of vertical as well as horizontal escalation is growing rapidly. With U.S. strategic assets mobilizing across Europe and the Middle East, the potential for direct U.S. intervention can escalate the conflict further and complicate the resolution efforts. Currently, neither Israel’s ambition to dismantle the current Tehran regime and neutralize Iran nuclear program nor Iran’s objective to punish Israel for its crimes and undermine Netanyahu political regime offers a viable endgame without dragging the entire region—and potentially the world—into an uncontrollable spiral of escalation. The conflict, particularly when viewed from a wider lens to incorporate Israel war crimes in Gaza, has become a litmus test of credibility of contemporary global order. It is to be tested once again, how much space and credibility is left for ‘rule based order,’ and for how long the ‘power centric order’ will take the front seat.