WASHINGTON — Israel displayed its military superiority over opponent Iran in its apparent precise attacks that struck close to military and nuclear targets deep in the heart of the country, encountering little significant opposition from Iran’s defenses. This provided the world with fresh insights into the capabilities of both militaries.
The global community, Israel, and Iran all indicated hopes that the airstrikes on Friday would bring an end to what has been a perilous 19-day series of attacks and counterattacks, a highly publicized test between two deep-seated rivals that had previously avoided direct confrontation.
The escalation into open conflict began on April 1 with the suspected Israeli assassination of Iranian generals at an Iranian diplomatic compound in Syria. This led to Iran's retaliatory barrage last weekend of over 300 missiles and drones, which the U.S., Israel, and regional and international partners helped intercept without substantial damage in Israel. And then came the apparent Israeli strike on Friday.
As all parties assessed the situation, regional security experts anticipated that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government and the country’s allies would be emboldened by the superior performance of the Israeli military. In response to international appeals, however, both Israel and Iran had seemed to be restraining their full military strength throughout the more than two weeks of hostilities, seeking to convey messages rather than escalate to a full-scale war.
Importantly, experts also warned that Iran had not employed its greatest military advantage over Israel — Hezbollah and other Iran-allied armed groups in the region. In particular, Hezbollah has the capability to strain Israel’s ability to defend itself, especially in a multifront conflict.
In general, “the key takeaway is that unless Iran uses all its resources simultaneously, it is the underdog, and not the superior force, in this situation,” said Charles Lister, a senior fellow and long-standing regional researcher at the Washington-based Middle East Institute.
Apart from those Iranian proxy forces, “the Israelis have every advantage on every military level,” Lister said.
According to Iranian state television, the country’s air defense systems were activated in several provinces following reports of drones. Iranian army commander Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi stated that crews targeted several flying objects.
Lister mentioned that it seemed to have been a single mission carried out by a small number of Israeli aircraft. After traversing Syrian airspace, it seems they launched only two or three Blue Sparrow air-to-surface missiles into Iran, most likely from a standoff position in the airspace of Iran’s neighbor, Iraq, he added.
Iran stated that its air defenses fired at a significant air base near Isfahan. Isfahan also hosts facilities linked to Iran’s nuclear program, including its underground Natanz enrichment site, which has been repeatedly targeted in suspected Israeli sabotage attacks.
Israel has not claimed responsibility for either the April 1 or Friday attacks.
The Jewish Institute for National Security of America, a center in Washington that supports Israeli-U.S. security connections, quickly noted that the small strike on Friday showed that Israel could cause much more damage if it decided to launch a bigger strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Iran’s attack last weekend, on the other hand, seems to have used most of its 150 long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel, which is more than 1,000 miles away, according to retired Gen. Frank McKenzie, former commander of the U.S. military’s Central Command.
Due to the distance and the ease with which the U.S. and others can monitor missile deployments using space sensors and regional radar, “it is difficult for Iran to launch a surprise attack against Israel,” McKenzie explained.
