The Iranian ayatollah’s strategy from the outset was to light a “ring of fire” around Israel to burn it to death.
Iran tried to light a ring of fire around Israel. But now Israel wields the blowtorch
Iran tried to light a ring of fire around Israel. But now Israel wields the blowtorch
Peter Hartcher
Political and international editor
October 2, 2024 — 6.42pm
The Iranian ayatollah’s strategy from the outset was to light a “ring of fire” around Israel to burn it to death.
Hamas attacked Israel on October 7 and “the day after October 7 was the day Iran ignited the ring of fire”, says retired Australian army colonel Mike Kelly, a former Labor minister for defence materiel.
The ring has many parts to it and all flared up: Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Kataib Hezbollah in Iraq, just to name the biggest.
All are armed, financed and directed by Iran. For instance, as the late Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, once said: “Hezbollah’s budget, everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, comes from the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
Or Hamas, whose military commander Yahya Sinwar said of his forces in 2017: “Relations with Iran are excellent and Iran is the largest supporter of the Izz ad Din al Qassam Brigades with money and arms.”
Iran’s strategy is shrewd. Why should Iran expose itself to Israeli attack when its armies of affiliates were only too happy to martyr themselves for the cause?
“A situation was created,” says former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, “in which Iran had a border with Israel but Israel had no border with Iran, which is more than 1000 miles away.”
But the strategy is failing. Israel has inflicted so much damage on Iran’s proxies, has doused so much of the fire, that Iran finally felt compelled to engage the enemy itself.
“I don’t think Iran really wanted a war with Israel,” says ANU professor emeritus of Middle East studies, Amin Saikal.
“But Iran got to the point of saying to Israel, ‘No, you’re not going to agree to a ceasefire in Gaza, you’re invading Lebanon’, and at the same time Iran wanted to maintain its credibility and its network of affiliates.”
The result? Iran bombarded Israel with 180 ballistic missiles on Tuesday night, Australian time. After its missile and drone assault on Israel in April, this was only the second time Iran has struck Israel directly.
'Serious retaliation' looming for Iran after Israel missile attack
United Nations says Israeli tanks forced their way into a peacekeeping base in Lebanon
David Wood from International Crisis Group speaks to Today live from Lebanon in the wake of the Iran missile launch on Israel.
And, for the second time, while it terrified Israeli civilians, Iran’s missiles proved impotent against the combined interception effort of Israel, the United States, Britain, France and Jordan.
But instead of intensifying its attack, Iran has pulled back. It immediately declared its action complete.
Can Israel’s Iron Dome withstand Iran’s missiles?
It has many thousands more missiles that it could fire and possibly overwhelm Israel’s air defences, but it is not. Its air force has stayed on the ground. It is not threatening escalation or hinting at nuclear attack.
The regime of Ayatollah Khamenei is unpopular at home and its economy is crushed by sanctions imposed by the West. “Iran doesn’t want an all-out regional war because of the damage it would do to Iran but also damage it would do to the regime,” says retired Australian major general Mick Ryan.
But with the ring of fire sputtering and smouldering, Israel now confronts the chief arsonist in his own home. And Iran has given Israel the opportunity to impose a punishing retaliation.
“Netanyahu,” observes Ryan, “is also in regime-preservation mode.” He has promised to retaliate and, unlike in April, the White House this time is not urging restraint.
Israel “would love to attack” Iran’s nuclear development facilities attests Ryan, a military and political achievement that Netanyahu craves, “but whether they have reach is another question”.
With the ring of fire subdued and the arsonist exposed, Tehran is in a very vulnerable position as it awaits Israel’s next move.
On Friday, on the outskirts of Lebanon’s capital of Beirut, the leaders of Hezbollah filed into their bunker 20 metres underground to meet with the Iranian general responsible for arming and directing them.
Some Hezbollah commanders had a complaint in mind, according to reporting by the Wall Street Journal. Hezbollah is the world’s most heavily armed non-state military force, according to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
Iran has spent billions of dollars over decades helping arm it with an estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles. Yet the terrorist army does not make its own decisions.
It is a creature of the ayatollahs in Iran. Its chiefs swear loyalty to the Supreme Leader of the Shia theocracy, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. And, on Friday, some Hezbollah commanders reportedly were smarting under the restraints he’d imposed on them.
Lebanon-based Hezbollah, the “party of God”, had been firing missiles into Israel for nearly a year in a regular but restrained fusillade. It had been effective in forcing Israel to evacuate some 60,000 of its citizens from its border regions, and keeping them evacuated.
But now the Zionists had humiliated and hurt Hezbollah. By detonating thousands of booby trapped paging devices and walkie-talkies while they were in the hands and pockets of Hezbollah members, Israel had brought death deep inside their communities, their homes, their families.
The Hezbollah leaders wanted Iran to free them to unleash greater violence, deeper into Israel. In the presence of their storied leader, Hassan Nasrallah, they would put their case directly to Iran’s General Abbas Nilforushan, the deputy commander for operations of the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps. But the “party of God” leadership was prematurely called to higher consultation, taking the Iranian general with them. Israel had tried and failed to kill Nasrallah many times in his three decades as Hezbollah leader, including at least two occasions when its bombs failed to penetrate his protective bunkers.
Israel claims to have killed Hezbollah leader in Lebanon strike
United Nations says Israeli tanks forced their way into a peacekeeping base in Lebanon
The Israeli military reportedly targeted Hassan Nasrallah with a strike on the central headquarters of Hezbollah in Beirut, where a series of massive explosions levelled multiple buildings.
But now Israeli jets dropped a tightly timed chain of massive 2000-pound missiles to tear deep into his shelter, each explosive smashing a hole through concrete for the next bomb to penetrate further.
US President Joe Biden described it as “a measure of justice” for a man who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Israelis as well as hundreds of Americans and dozens of French citizens over the decades.
The assassination shows not only that Israel has mastered the technical ability to penetrate protected bunkers, but that it has achieved highly sophisticated intelligence capabilities, human and signals. The Israelis knew exactly when and where Nasrallah would be there.
The killing of Nasrallah is a major event, a “historic turning point” according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Among Shia Muslims, Nasrallah was regarded as second only to Khamenei in stature. The ayatollah announced an extended national mourning of five days accordingly. Among other groups in Lebanon, however, he was not loved but loathed. Hezbollah is a parasite on Lebanon, one that has overtaken its host.
For all its significance, it’s just one piece of a much bigger picture. Israel’s move against Nasrallah is part of a sudden and savage, deep and wide assault on thousands of Hezbollah targets including its missile launchers and weapon and fuel stockpiles as well as its fighters and commanders.
“This is the beginning of the end of Hezbollah as we have known it for the past several decades,” Lina Khatib of London’s Chatham House think tank told the Washington Post.
And the new campaign against Hezbollah is, in turn, just one part of Israel’s sweeping offensive against Iran’s proxy militias. Hezbollah is the biggest of the groups comprising the so-called “ring of fire” lit by Tehran to burn Israel to death.
Israel for years has lived under threat from these groups – Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen, and various smaller militias in the Iranian satrapies of Syria and Iraq.
But today Israel is routing Hamas, dismembering Hezbollah, assailing the Houthis and effectively suppressing attacks from the lesser militias in Syria and Iraq.
What of the running news media refrain, repeated near-daily for months now, that each act of aggression “pushes the region to the brink of an all-out war”?
It’s pretty much there already, and Israel is winning; the only potentially seismic intensification would be a decision by the ayatollahs to escalate their war on Israel from an indirect one to a direct one. But Tehran is in no mood to fight Israel frontally, state-on-state.
First, its impotence has been exposed. When it assailed Israel with more than 300 missiles and drones in April, Israel closed ranks with the US, France, Britain and Jordan to block and destroy all but a handful. Israel suffered no serious damage.
Second, Tehran’s priorities are elsewhere. Iran’s reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian, elected in July after Khamenei decided to allow more conciliation and less confrontation, is seeking to reconcile the regime with the Iranian people, relaxing its repressive hijab fanaticism, and to renegotiate Iran’s status as a pariah with the West. Who’s afraid of the ayatollahs now?
Netanyahu says Israel is “changing the balance of power” in the Middle East and few impartial analysts would disagree. But what will he do with Israel’s newly asserted power?
Israel needs the judgment to be able to recognise “the culminating point of victory” when it arrives, in the words of the great Prussian strategist Clausewitz, to convert military gain into sustainable new political reality.
Netanyahu may yet manage this but so far, he’s proved unwilling or unable to develop any strategy beyond the military. The only interest in political strategy he’s demonstrated to date is in his narrow, personal one of holding power at any cost.
His failure to prevent the Hamas attack a year ago pummelled his political standing in Israel; the country’s success against Hezbollah has restored it, according to the polls. To the point where Israeli commentators are speculating that he’ll call an early election to capitalise on his recovery and extend his grip on power. Can Netanyahu escape his own bunker mentality?
Peter Hartcher
Sydney Morning Herald