“Iran’s leadership is prepared to accept humiliating setbacks in the face of an Israeli attack in the short term to protect the regime in the long term, and this explains Tehran’s lack of retaliation so far,” said Alex Vatanka, Iran director. Program at the Washington-based Middle East Institute.
Iran could push for more asymmetric attacks, targeting Jewish tourists, synagogues or Israeli diplomatic missions as it has done in the past. Netanyahu on Monday issued a warning to Iran about the possible risk, saying: “Nowhere else in the Middle East Israel can’t achieve it.”
Tehran could also weaponize its nuclear program. The country has been enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels following the collapse of a nuclear deal with major powers in 2015. Hardline voices within Iran’s theocracy, such as the Kahyan daily, have called for a “harsher” response than the attacks in April, which causes little damage.
But this is in direct conflict with the plans of Iran’s new reformist President, Masoud Pezeshkian, who campaigned on a promise to lift harsh economic sanctions against Iran. This is increasingly important as energy prices continue to fall and Iran will likely sell its oil at a discount because it cannot access many countries.
If “the nuclear agreement commitments are implemented fully and in good faith, dialogue on other issues can follow,” Pezeshkian said at the UN General Assembly last week.
Ending sanctions would require a deal with the West on the nuclear program, something that would be nearly impossible if Iran were to engage in all-out war with Iran. Israel. Easing economic pressure remains important for Iran’s domestic stability, as authorities recall months of protests following Mahsa Amini’s death in 2022.
“For now it seems that the president and the supreme leader, being very cautious, want to keep the lines open for dialogue and negotiations,” Vakil said.
And to keep that pathway open, Iran needs someone else to take the lead Israel.