Both countries know a war would be catastrophic, yet neither can afford to back down

By Abbas Milani

Japan Times

STANFORD, CALIFORNIA – Iran and Israel have long been locked in a volatile confrontation — a cold war chronically in danger of turning hot.
Weaponizing a peculiar brand of Islam that denigrates nationalism in favor of an Islamic state, Iran’s clerical regime has partly defined its divine mission as requiring Israel’s elimination. To that end, Iran has created and armed proxies across the region, from Gaza and Lebanon to Syria and Yemen.

In recent months, however, the proxy warfare and clandestine operations have given way to the possibility of a direct, all-out conflict. While both sides understand the peril of the moment, the Iranian regime is at pains both to save face and to survive, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems keen to strike while his foe is vulnerable.

Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attack was a painful turning point for Israel. While Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, lauded Hamas’s successful operation as a sign of the imminent demise of the “Zionist Entity,” other Iranian clerics went so far as to declare it a harbinger of the 12th Imam’s return, which will bring the global triumph of Islam. The brutal assault on helpless civilians shattered Israel’s longstanding aura of inviolability and Israel’s yearlong campaign in Gaza became a propaganda bonanza for the Iranian regime. While Gazans are themselves virtual hostages of Hamas’s despotic theocracy, the images of their suffering have helped the hostage-takers and their backers in Tehran.

But Iran’s ruling clerics don’t want a full-blown war, especially following the heavy losses suffered by their proxies. America’s assassination of Qassem Suleimani in 2020 struck a seismic blow to Iran’s Quds Force, the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps unit that is responsible for projecting Iran’s influence and organizing most of the regime’s terrorist activity. Since then, Iran has watched as Israel has eliminated more Iranian officials and the top leaders of Hamas (Ismail Haniyeh) and Hezbollah (Hassan Nasrallah).

These strikes, many of them achieved through daring acts of espionage and assassination, demonstrate the extent to which Israeli intelligence (Mossad) has infiltrated Iran and its proxies’ ranks. The “axis of resistance” that Iran has spent decades and many billions of dollars cultivating is facing unprecedented challenges, and this has diminished the regime’s ability to project strength vis-a-vis Israel.

Given this broader context, Iran’s ruling clerics find themselves in a difficult position. Longstanding international sanctions and the regime’s own corrupt cronyism have taken a toll on the economy, leading to widespread discontent and simmering political unrest. Ordinary Iranians, often led by women, are defiantly demanding equality, freedom and living conditions commensurate with the country’s abundant natural and human capital.

To engage in a debilitating war with Israel would further destabilize the regime, perhaps even leading to its demise. Though Shakespeare observed that rulers can keep “giddy minds” busy with “foreign quarrels,” Iran’s clerics know that a deeply dissatisfied population could be tempted to rebel if forced to bear the torments of another violent misadventure.

Moreover, the same proxies that Iran deploys against Israel, U.S. forces and other regional players (like Saudi Arabia) have also occasionally been used to quell domestic protests. As the proxy network weakens, Iran’s clerics will feel doubly vulnerable and thus desperate to re-establish deterrence against regional foes and domestic dissidents alike.

They must tread carefully, though. Iran’s latest salvo of missiles into Israel was part of the dance of deterrence. The attack was immediately followed by an announcement that the regime’s “revenge” operation was complete, indicating that it hopes to avoid further escalation. A war between Israel and the Islamic Republic would inevitably draw in the United States, and the Iranians know that they would stand no chance against such combined military might.

Netanyahu also faces serious challenges. Any prolonged conflict would stretch Israel’s resources and possibly lead to massive casualties. It is difficult to anticipate what impact a costly war would have on his already deeply divided government. Netanyahu has oriented his political legacy around blocking Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, yet he might unwittingly hasten the very outcome he fears most. The situation is complex, but one likely scenario is that an even more desperate clerical regime could declare itself a nuclear state in a bid to establish a new, more dangerous form of deterrence.

Khamenei has always been the chief architect of the country’s nuclear program and the mullahs have long relied on the Western delusion that concessions and promises of compromise can deter their quest to join the club of nuclear-weapon states. The regime claims that it is bound by a fatwa from Khamenei not to seek weapons of mass destruction and it has always maintained that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. Yet many of the same figures who have repeated these talking points now say that every piece of the puzzle for a bomb is in place.

Obviously, this scenario carries enormous risks. A rush to complete the bomb would almost certainly provoke Israel — and perhaps the U.S. — to launch preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, and this would almost certainly trigger a wider conflict. Iranian proxies might be unleashed on U.S. bases, Saudi oil facilities, international shipping and other targets, with devastating consequences for the region and the global economy.

Israel and Iran are both walking a tightrope. Israel is still grappling with the loss of its aura of inviolability following the Hamas attack and Iran is struggling to maintain its regional influence as its proxies suffer heavy losses. Both countries are keenly aware that an all-out war would be catastrophic, yet neither side can afford to back down entirely.

The West urgently needs to develop an Iran strategy. The U.S. and its allies have long relied on tactical, remedial responses to each escalation. But the only real solution is a democratic Iran. Neither the Israeli nor the U.S. military can bring about that outcome, but the Iranian people can and they have grown increasingly determined in recent years. For now, the rest of the world must confront and contain the regime’s egregious behavior, while doing what it can to support Iranians’ democratic aspirations.

Abbas Milani is director of the Iranian Studies Program at Stanford University and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. © Project Syndicate, 2024