What Happens If Iran Attacks Israel? A Deep Dive

The Middle East remains a powder keg, with geopolitical tensions perpetually simmering. Among the most volatile flashpoints is the long-standing, often covert, but increasingly overt rivalry between Iran and Israel. The question of "what will happen if Iran attacks Israel" is no longer a hypothetical exercise; it's a pressing concern that has global implications, dominating headlines and driving strategic discussions in capitals worldwide. The shadow of direct confrontation looms larger than ever, raising fears of a regional conflagration with far-reaching consequences.

For decades, the animosity between these two regional powers has manifested in proxy wars, cyberattacks, and targeted assassinations. However, the unprecedented direct missile and drone assault by Iran on Israeli territory in April marked a dangerous escalation, shifting the paradigm from shadow boxing to open confrontation. Understanding the potential ramifications of further attacks, the motivations behind them, and the likely responses is crucial for grasping the precarious balance of power in one of the world's most critical regions.

A History of Escalating Tensions: The Road to Direct Confrontation

The current heightened state of alert, with Israel bracing for a major assault by Iran, has roots stretching back years, even decades. While tensions have always been present, they have risen to levels not seen since the October 7 Hamas attacks. Iran has long been a vocal adversary of Israel, with Iranian leaders having vowed repeatedly to wipe out Israel. This rhetoric is not merely symbolic; Iran has actively funded and armed terror groups on Israel’s borders, including Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, creating a network of proxies designed to encircle and pressure the Jewish state. On the other side, Israel has publicly described its attacks on Iran as aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. For years, Israel has been engaged in a shadow war, reportedly killing Iran’s military personnel in foreign countries and being behind acts of sabotage and terrorism inside Iran. These operations, often targeting Iran's nuclear program and other strategic assets, were part of a broader strategy to degrade Iran's capabilities and deter its ambitions. For instance, USA Today reports that on June 12, Israel began an air campaign targeting Iran's nuclear program and leadership, specifically Iran's uranium enrichment facilities. The Islamic Republic’s leadership, however, assessed that a lack of action on their part would make the Israelis more confident in thinking that they could continue waging such operations without paying a price. This perception of impunity on Israel's part, coupled with the cumulative effect of Israeli strikes, likely fueled Iran's decision to finally respond directly, setting the stage for the unprecedented events of April.

The April 13th Precedent: An Unprecedented Direct Attack

On Saturday night, April 13th, Iran fired more than 200 missiles and drones at Israel. This unprecedented attack — from Iranian soil to Israeli territory — marked the most direct confrontation ever between the two nations. It was a significant departure from Iran's usual reliance on proxies and a clear signal of a shift in its strategic calculus. However, the effectiveness of this massive barrage was largely mitigated. An estimated 99% of the missiles and drones that they launched in April failed to hit a target, largely due to a robust Israeli air defense system, aided by the United States and other allies. The U.S. had sent fighter jets and warships to the Middle East, while Britain also provided support, playing a crucial role in repelling the attack. This high rate of interception led many to question whether Iran and its proxies would attempt another aerial attack on Israel of the same kind. It’s unlikely that Iran will repeat the same kind of attack it launched against Israel on April 13, which mostly relied on drones and some missile strikes that were quickly repelled by the U.S. and its partners.

Intelligence Assessments: The Imminent Threat

Despite the limited success of the April 13th attack, the threat of further Iranian action remains very real. As we hear the news that Iran could attack Israel in the next 48 hours, the world holds its breath, asking: what's the worst that could happen if Iran attacks? The White House on Monday confirmed that U.S. intelligence indicates it is increasingly likely Iran will attack Israel this week, matching the latest Israeli intelligence assessment. This new intelligence suggests an attack could come before the Gaza hostage and ceasefire deal talks planned for Thursday, which could potentially derail indirect negotiations and further complicate the already fragile regional dynamics. The immediate concern is not just the scale of a potential attack, but its nature. Given the failure of the April 13th barrage, Iran is likely re-evaluating its approach. The question of whether Iran and its proxies would attempt another aerial attack on Israel — after an estimated 99% of the missiles and drones that they launched in April failed to hit a target — is also unclear. This suggests that any future attack might be more sophisticated, involve different types of weaponry, or target different vulnerabilities.

Iran's Motivations and Strategic Calculus

Understanding why Iran might attack Israel is key to anticipating its actions. Even as it conducts its own attacks on Israel, Iran is weighing up its military and diplomatic choices, a complex calculation driven by multiple factors.

Deterrence and Credibility

A primary motivation for Iran's direct strike in April, and any potential future attack, is the restoration of deterrence. After years of Israel killing Iran’s military personnel in foreign countries and being behind acts of sabotage and terrorism inside Iran, the Islamic Republic’s leadership assessed that a lack of action would make the Israelis more confident in thinking that they could continue waging such operations without paying a price. Iran seeks to establish a new equation where Israeli aggression is met with direct Iranian retaliation, thereby raising the cost for Israel's operations. This is about maintaining credibility both domestically and among its regional allies and proxies.

The Nuclear Dimension

The nuclear program remains a central point of contention. Before Israel launched a surprise attack on Iran’s nuclear program and other targets last week, Iran and the United States were discussing limits on Iran’s uranium enrichment. Israel's stated purpose for its attacks on Iran has been aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. However, nearly a week into the war, it is less than clear that this stated purpose is the only one. Iran views its nuclear program as a sovereign right and a strategic deterrent, while Israel sees it as an existential threat. Any attack by Iran could be a response to perceived Israeli attempts to sabotage its nuclear infrastructure, or a means to signal its resolve in the face of such pressure.

Israel's Preparedness and Potential Responses

Israel is bracing for a major assault by Iran, with tensions rising to levels not seen since the October 7 Hamas attacks. Its military and intelligence agencies are on high alert, preparing for various scenarios. The success of the April 13th defense, while impressive, does not guarantee future immunity. Israel's defense strategy relies on a multi-layered air defense system, early warning capabilities, and strong intelligence. Should Iran attack again, Israel is set to retaliate for Iran's missile attack, while Tehran says it will hit back in turn if this happens. This tit-for-tat escalation is precisely what regional and international actors fear most. Israel's potential targets in Iran could include military installations, missile sites, drone manufacturing facilities, and potentially, nuclear-related sites, though striking the latter carries significant risks of wider escalation.

Risks for Israel in Retaliation

However, retaliation carries risks of its own for Israel. A major Israeli strike on Iranian soil could provoke a much larger, more sustained response from Iran and its proxies, potentially drawing Israel into a multi-front war. This could involve intensified rocket fire from Hezbollah in Lebanon, renewed attacks from Hamas in Gaza, and potential unrest in the West Bank. The sheer scale of such a conflict could overwhelm Israel's defense capabilities and stretch its resources thin. Furthermore, an Israeli strike that inflicts significant casualties or damage in Iran could push the Iranian regime to take even more extreme measures, possibly accelerating its nuclear program or directly targeting Israeli civilians with more sophisticated weaponry.

The US Role and International Implications

The United States plays a pivotal role in this volatile equation. For all the U.S. denials, Iran clearly believes American forces endorsed and at least tacitly supported Israel's attacks. This perception, whether accurate or not, complicates the U.S.'s ability to de-escalate the situation and places American forces in the region at potential risk. The U.S. has sent fighter jets and warships to the Middle East, signaling its commitment to Israel's security and its readiness to defend its own interests and personnel in the region.

US Deterrence Efforts and Support for Israel

A U.S. official warns Iran of ‘cataclysmic’ consequences if it attacks Israel. A senior official says an Iranian strike would ‘basically derail what we think is the best opportunity’ in months to achieve a broader regional de-escalation, including a potential Gaza hostage and ceasefire deal. The U.S. has consistently affirmed its ironclad commitment to Israel's security, providing military aid, intelligence sharing, and diplomatic backing. However, Washington is also keen to avoid a full-blown regional war that could destabilize global energy markets and draw the U.S. into another costly conflict. The challenge for the U.S. is to deter Iran without inadvertently provoking it, a delicate balancing act in a region rife with miscalculation.

Economic Fallout: The Global Price of Conflict

Beyond the immediate human cost, a full-scale conflict between Iran and Israel would have severe economic repercussions, particularly for global energy markets. Experts believe that oil prices would likely rise higher than $100 if that were to happen. Iran is a major oil producer, and any disruption to its oil exports or the vital shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf (such as the Strait of Hormuz) would send shockwaves through the global economy. Higher oil prices would fuel inflation, potentially triggering recessions in vulnerable economies worldwide. Shipping costs would also skyrocket, impacting global supply chains and consumer prices. The uncertainty generated by such a conflict would also deter investment, leading to a slowdown in economic activity.

Beyond Direct Attacks: The Role of Proxies

While direct attacks capture headlines, a significant part of the "what will happen if Iran attacks Israel" scenario involves Iran's vast network of proxies. These groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and various militias in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, could be activated to launch simultaneous attacks on Israel. This multi-front assault is a key component of Iran's strategy, designed to overwhelm Israel's defenses and create widespread chaos. Hezbollah, with its estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles, poses the most significant conventional threat, capable of striking deep inside Israel. A full-scale engagement with Hezbollah could devastate parts of northern Israel and trigger a far more destructive war than any direct exchange with Iran itself. The involvement of these proxies adds layers of complexity and unpredictability to any escalation, making de-escalation efforts incredibly challenging.

Conclusion

The prospect of Iran attacking Israel directly is a grave concern, not just for the Middle East but for the entire world. The April 13th attack demonstrated Iran's willingness to cross a red line, and the subsequent intelligence assessments suggest further action is increasingly likely. The motivations are clear: Iran seeks to restore deterrence and respond to perceived Israeli aggression, while Israel is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and to defend itself from any attack. The consequences of a full-blown conflict would be catastrophic, leading to widespread loss of life, regional destabilization, and severe global economic repercussions, particularly in energy markets. The involvement of the United States and other international actors adds another layer of complexity, as they navigate the delicate balance between supporting allies and preventing a wider war. As the world watches anxiously, the need for de-escalation and diplomatic solutions has never been more urgent. Understanding the intricate web of motivations, historical grievances, and strategic calculations is essential for anyone seeking to comprehend this critical geopolitical challenge. What do you think is the most effective way to prevent further escalation between Iran and Israel? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and consider exploring our other articles on regional security and international relations for more insights.