Washington DC – The US President Joe Biden administration's response to Iran's historic missile and drone attack on Israel has been twofold. While reiterating his pledge that Washington will always support Israel as an “ironclad” ally, he also appealed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Benjamin's government. Prime Minister Netanyahu called for no further action that could drag the region into a wider war.
Analysts told Al Jazeera that the coming days will reveal whether these two options are compatible or whether the priorities of the two governments are on the verge of colliding.
In the short term, the April 13-14 attack on Iran is a coup for both Israel and its supporter, the United States. From their point of view, this provides new justification for military aid to Israel while also providing a seven-month They say it will reduce global attention to allegations of abuses in Gaza during the war.
But Netanyahu's defiance of calls for U.S. restraint could leave the Biden administration further hobbled by its political and ideological commitments to Israel, potentially dragging the U.S. into a broader war. He added that there is.
“Israelis were told by Biden to take this as a victory and stop here,” Parsi told Al Jazeera. “While that is helpful, it is by no means a powerful and clear imagination given that Prime Minister Netanyahu has been systematically defying Biden’s advice and warnings in private for the past seven months.”
“Given the fact that we are looking into the abyss when it comes to this region, now is the time for Biden to be clearer and clearer in drawing the lines that Israel and Netanyahu must not cross to avoid plunging the entire region into war. This is the moment when we have to become stronger.”
Operation “Promise of Truth”
On Saturday, Biden cut short his weekend trip and returned to Washington, D.C., as Iran fired hundreds of drones and missiles at Israel in an operation dubbed “True Promise.”
The attack was Iran's first direct attack on Israel, and Iranian officials said it was aimed at establishing “deterrence.” This is a direct response to Israel's April 1 attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, which killed eight people, including two Iranian generals, and was widely condemned as a violation of diplomatic norms. It was done as a reaction. Under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, each country's embassy is considered equivalent to sovereign territory, and legally bombing an Iranian diplomatic mission in Syria is tantamount to an attack on Iranian soil.
However, several analysts suggested that Tehran's attack may have been intended as a signal to Washington. The United States and Israel said nearly all of the more than 300 launches were intercepted, with only minor damage reported. The attack thus allowed Tehran to carry out what many considered an inevitable response to the Israeli consulate attack, while at the same time increasing the likelihood of a surprise attack or a proxy force. Some variables were eliminated. Khalil Jashan, executive director of the Arab Center in Washington, D.C., said it would lead to uncontrollable conflict.
“I'm not sensitive to conspiracy theories, but I feel like in the last few days there has been some coordination between the parties in this matter,” Jashan told Al Jazeera, reportedly adding that the region It was pointed out that this was done through a third party.
“A lot of information is shared between Tehran and Washington. [the attack] That wasn't surprising… In another sense, this is a kind of political theater. ”
Reuters reported on Sunday that the United States had been in contact with Iran through Swiss intermediaries before and after the attack, citing Biden administration officials. However, the official denied that Iran had given any “notification” before the launch, insisting that the launch was intended to “destroy and cause casualties.”
“Arsonist and Firefighter”
In response to the attack, Iran's mission to the United Nations said in a statement that “the matter can be considered resolved,” indicating there were no further plans for retaliation against Israel.
“But if the Israeli regime makes another mistake, Iran's response will be much harsher,” he said, warning the United States to “stand back.”
Meanwhile, senior U.S. and Israeli officials spent the hours following the attack on a flurry of phone calls, with Biden reportedly telling Netanyahu that the U.S. would not support Israel's subsequent attack on Iran. Biden sought to quell further fighting, administration officials said, while emphasizing the strength Israel expected to defend against attacks.
The Biden administration's response represents “a microcosm of their overall approach since October 7,” said Brian Finucane, senior US program adviser at Crisis Group.
The approach, he said, is to “play the role of both arsonist and firefighter in Israel-Palestine and the broader Middle East region.”
The Biden administration has provided material and political support to Israel amid the Gaza war, even as it faces mounting domestic pressure for aid conditions amid allegations of Israeli abuses in the enclave. continuing. According to Gaza authorities, at least 33,729 Palestinians have been killed since the war began.
His government has been criticized in recent weeks for applying mainly rhetorical pressure on Netanyahu's government and refusing to use material influence. However, an April 1 Israeli military attack in Gaza killed seven World Central Kitchen aid workers (including American citizens and nationals of its allies), prompting the Biden administration to take unprecedented action against Israel. He took the toughest stance.
Still, Finucane explained that US weapons have enabled Israeli attacks across the region for years, “possibly in violation of US law.”
“Israeli attacks in Syria, including the April 1 attack on Damascus that triggered this particular crisis, have been carried out with U.S.-supplied fighter jets,” he said, adding that the use of U.S. weapons is It was pointed out that this may violate the Arms Export Control Act. Use only in cases of legitimate self-defense.
Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, pointed to the opposition of the United States, Britain and France to the United Nations Security Council's statement in early April condemning Israel's attack on the Iranian consulate. He described it as “an escalating violation of normal diplomatic rules.”
“The United States says it's time to stop this escalation,” Landis told Al Jazeera. “But in reality, it is adding fuel to the fire by siding with Israel too unilaterally and violating international norms.”
Will Prime Minister Netanyahu listen?
Analysts told Al Jazeera that the current situation leaves the next move entirely in Israel's hands.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have not yet said whether or how they will respond, but some in the government are calling for a firm response.
“Ironically, I think it's very clear that Washington and Tehran are getting closer to that goal. Neither wants escalation for their own reasons,” Firas Maqsad, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Al Jazeera. told.
“Netanyahu is the wild card here. And the danger for the US is that [Israel] “If we do not heed their calls for peace, they may be drawn in and perhaps forced to reluctantly come to Israel's aid,” he said.
Domestic politics will likely determine future developments in both the United States and Israel, said Andreas Krieg, a senior lecturer in security at King's College in London.
“Prime Minister Netanyahu urgently needs a winning story. He urgently needs to project some strength to his voters,” Krieg told Al Jazeera.
“That makes him an even more escalatory candidate,” he said. “Certainly, he has always been very risk-taking when it comes to his political survival…so it's not really about Israel's security interests, it's about his own political survival. It is.”
The Israeli prime minister has been the target of regular and large-scale protests in Israel, with many calling for his resignation. Analysts have suggested that Netanyahu's best bet to remain in power is to continue the war.
Meanwhile, the Iranian attack has already galvanized efforts to increase military aid to Israel, weeks after it has ramped up pressure on the Biden administration to attach conditions to aid to allies in the Middle East. U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson said Sunday that the chamber plans to vote on additional aid to Israel later this week.
“[The attack] We changed the story. Today we are talking about Israel facing unprecedented attack from Iran, not about starving children in the Gaza Strip.'' Crisis Group's Finukane he said. “We're not talking about the drone attacks on aid workers in the Gaza Strip that made headlines a week ago.”
And while political pressure on Biden to end the war will continue, Netanyahu also recognizes that Biden is likely to see the political cost of breaking with Israel even higher in an election year. added Landis of the University of Oklahoma.
“Ultimately, the bad news coming out of this is that Israel is preparing for a very long war in Gaza,” he said.
Jashan of the Arab Center said Biden will break away from Netanyahu because of long-standing U.S. policy, regardless of what actions the Israeli leader takes and how it affects the region. He said he couldn't picture the scenario.
“Based on my personal knowledge, [Biden] “Having watched and dealt with him for decades, I don't think he has the ability to bring his differences with Israel to a final conclusion,” he said.
“It will probably become more verbose and double-talking, but will it be a significant policy change? I don't foresee that.”
