What calculations are behind Tehran’s major missile strike on Israel?

As Tehran launched a major missile strike targeting Israel from its own territory on Tuesday night in a shock decision to enter the fray in the now-regional conflict, early indications suggest this attack was far more calculated and bold than the one in April.

The sight of hundreds of Iranian missiles flying over Israel and the continuous sound of sirens in major Israeli cities made this assault far more serious than previous retaliations.

Tehran argues that the attack was an act of “self-defence” in response to repeated strikes on its territory and citizens.

After nearly two months of “strict restraint,” it claims the decision was made to retaliate for the deaths of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh, Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah and Abbass Nilforoushan, IRGC’s senior military adviser in Lebanon.

The IRGC also mentioned avenging the blood of Gaza’s children and Lebanon’s people in its statement.

Why did Iran strike now?

This issue has generated significant controversy in recent days, sparking speculation that Iran has abandoned its key ally in the region.

The new president, in fact, faced criticism for not retaliating against Israel following the assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran. (While Israel hasn’t taken responsibility, it is widely believed to have been behind Haniyeh’s death).

Hardliners argue that this inaction only emboldened Netanyahu, referencing the targeted killings of Nasrallah and Nilforoushan in Beirut last Friday.

Some critics even predicted that Netanyahu might now feel confident enough to carry out further assassinations inside Iran, potentially targeting Iranian leaders.

Tehran, therefore, felt it had no option but to respond to Israel to placate a portion of its domestic public and to reinvigorate the “Resistance Axis” in neighbouring countries.

Despite this, Israeli military operations in Lebanon have continued, and the Israeli army has stated they will persist until their goals are achieved.

What missiles were used and what about civilian flights?

While Iran claims that 90% of its projectiles hit their targets, Israeli officials counter that most missiles were intercepted by Israeli air defence systems, though they do not deny that some military bases may have been hit.

The IRGC claims to have used a new hypersonic missile, the Fattah-1, for the first time in striking at least three military bases.

The Fattah-1, described by Tehran as a “hypersonic” missile, reportedly travels at Mach 5, or five times the speed of sound (around 6,100 km/h). However, it remains unclear how many Fattah-1 missiles were actually launched.

Meanwhile, Iran’s Civil Aviation Organisation announced that all flights in the country will remain suspended until 5 am local time on Thursday.

ADVERTISEMENT

This cancellation could reflect Tehran’s concerns about a swift Israeli retaliation. The announcement followed Iran’s launch of at least 180 missiles at Israel and the brief closure of Ben Gurion Airport during the missile attack.

It is still unclear whether Iran had fully closed its airspace at the start of the attack. Videos from passengers on a flight, showing them watching the missiles from their windows, have raised suspicions and revived memories of the Ukrainian plane shot down by the IRGC nearly four years ago. The IRGC was accused of using civilians as human shields in that incident.

What comes next?

In his initial remarks, Benjamin Netanyahu made it clear that Iran had made a grave mistake with this attack and would face consequences. He stated: “The rule is: whoever attacks us, we will attack him.”

Iran’s oil facilities remain a potential target, and some speculate that Israel may resort to targeted assassinations or strike Iran’s air defence systems. Israel’s counterstrike in April was aimed at an S-300 air defence battery in Iran, marking the end of that round of direct attacks.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, the likelihood of an attack aimed at killing the commanders involved in Tuesday’s missile strike seems higher. Another option would be those Iranian refineries involved in gasoline production, as Iran is very vulnerable in this sector.

Typically, the emergence of any crisis in Iran, from unrest to fears of war, is manifested by long lines forming at gas stations, an issue that has been clearly evident in the past 24 hours.

On the other hand, Iranian diplomats and military commanders have suggested that their operation has concluded, implying that Iran will take no further action unless Israel responds. However, Iran has warned that any Israeli retaliation will be met with an even stronger response.

Tehran’s strategic options are unclear beyond its missile capabilities, especially as the US has expressed full support for Israel. The reactions from Western countries, most of which condemned Iran’s actions, show that Washington’s allies are also standing firmly behind Israel.

ADVERTISEMENT

This clearly shifts the balance in Israel’s favour, particularly as Iran’s strategic allies — Russia and China — remain ambiguous, frequently recalculating their stance based on national interests.

Some critics have cynically described Iran’s missile strike as an elaborate, expensive spectacle intended for public consumption.

Approximately 200 ballistic missiles were fired, yet no Israelis were killed, and only one Palestinian reportedly died. It remains uncertain whether the timing and geographic spread of the strikes during rush hour were part of a strategy to influence public opinion.

Regardless, the real victims of war and conflict are always ordinary civilians — people with no involvement in politics. Whether directly or indirectly, they suffer from violence or endure far-reaching consequences, including economic hardships and psychological trauma.

ADVERTISEMENT