Listening to the rhetoric that resonates between the main characters of the war in the Middle East, one gets the impression of witnessing a prosaic quarrel. But when words are fools' money, how can we measure the credibility of the threats exchanged between Iran and Israel?
A bubbling rhetoric
Following the attack launched by the Jewish state last Saturday against its Persian rival, Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian promised that his country would respond with “wiseness”.
The Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, indicated on Sunday that it was necessary “neither to exaggerate nor to minimize” the strikes carried out by Israel on Saturday against military sites in Iran.
A senior Iranian source told CNN that Iran was preparing a “definitive and painful” response that would likely come before the election, the network reported Wednesday.
In addition, Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, chief of staff of Iran's Supreme Leader, told Al-Mayadeen television on Thursday that the Iranian response was “certain.” He added that the Iranian response would be “strong” and “make our enemy regret” its attack.
On the Israeli side, army chief Herzi Halevi said Israel had shown restraint during its weekend attack on Iran. Army spokesman Daniel Hagari said that if Iran carries out retaliatory strikes, Israel will be “forced to respond.”
The economic imbalance
But “wisdom” implies an evaluation of the costs and benefits of possible alternatives. When World Bank data reveals that Israel has a GDP per capita of around $55,000, while Iran's does not exceed $6,000, it is clear which country can endure a war.
But that doesn't say much about the arsenal of the belligerents. In addition to the famous Iron Dome, the Jewish state has three anti-aircraft defense systems: David's Sling, the Arrow systems and the THAAD.
The Israeli umbrella
David's Sling can target long-range rockets and cruise missiles with a range of 40 to 300 km. Each launcher can carry up to 12 missiles, which destroy the enemy missile by the force of their impact alone. Two David's Sling batteries would be enough to cover the entire Israeli territory.
As for the Arrow systems, they are of two types. Arrow II can intercept a missile at 500 km. Arrow III goes even further: with an estimated range of 2,400 km, it aims to counter ballistic missiles operating beyond the atmosphere (i.e. approximately more than 100 km altitude).
Added to this is THAAD, of which the United States sent a battery to Israel on October 13 with around a hundred soldiers to strengthen the Jewish state's anti-missile defense in the face of Iranian threats.
THAAD intervenes in the last phase of the journey of ballistic missiles, as they begin their descent towards their target. It is capable of intercepting different types of missiles depending on their range: short missiles, which travel less than 1,000 km, medium ones, which range from 1,000 to 3,000 km, and intermediate ones, which can reach between 3,000 and 5,500 km. The system can engage targets up to a minimum distance of 200 km.
Although Israel already has a sophisticated air defense system, the Financial Times reveals that the country may lack interceptors to deal with missiles from the pro-Iranian axis.
The deployment of the American THAAD, which is part of an integrated defense strategy, could therefore be interpreted as a sign of weakness in Israeli defensive capabilities in the face of a potential coordinated attack by Iran and its allies.
Against the Iranian arsenal
Faced with this defense shield, Iran is adopting a saturation strategy by increasing the number of missiles fired to exhaust Israeli interception capabilities.
Its missile arsenal, among the largest in the Middle East, includes missiles such as the Shahab-3, with a range of 1,300 to 2,000 kilometers, which constitute the backbone of its strike forces. The newer, solid-propellant Sejil-2 missiles add to this threat by limiting Israeli preemptive interception possibilities thanks to faster preparation time.
Last October, during a massive attack involving nearly 200 ballistic missiles, Iran used three types of projectiles: the Fattah, the Ghadr-110 and the Emad. The Fattah, a medium-range ballistic missile, is described as hypersonic, but its actual ability to evade defense systems remains limited. Although this model can perform re-entry maneuvers to avoid defenses, the majority of Fattahs launched were intercepted.
The Ghadr-110, for its part, stands out for its speed and mobility, which allows it to take off from mobile platforms and more easily evade radars. However, it was also neutralized by high altitude defense systems like Arrow-3.
Finally, the Emad, an improved variant of the Shahab-3, is relatively efficient, but does not yet have the capabilities to inflict lasting damage against Israeli technologies.
Hit without touching
The confrontation between Israel and Iran is not limited to missile exchanges. Behind the scenes, Iran is mobilizing regional alliances to diversify its strategies and complicate Israeli responses. According to Israeli intelligence, an attack is being prepared in Iraq via pro-Iranian militias who have drones and ballistic missiles.
Information technologies are also part of Iran's arsenal. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has its own command responsible for cybersecurity. Thus, from October 7, 2023 to July 2024, almost half of the Iranian operations observed by Microsoft targeted Israeli companies, indicates the multinational's digital defense report.
An infinite loop?
On April 1, 2024, a strike attributed to Israel destroyed the Iranian consulate in Damascus, killing several Iranian military officials. In retaliation, Iran launched its first direct attack against Israel on April 13 with more than 300 drones and missiles, most of which were intercepted.
Israel responded on the night of April 19 to 20 with a targeted strike on the Isfahan region, in Iran. This sequence marks the first direct attacks between the two countries on their respective territories.
On October 1, 2024, Iran launched approximately 200 ballistic missiles at targets in Israel in at least two waves, the largest attack in the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict.
Iran claimed the attack – which it called “Operation Honest Promise 2” – was an act of “self-defense” in retaliation for Israel's killing of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, and the general of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Abbas Nilforoushan.
Israel responded on October 26, 2024 by launching three waves of strikes against 20 military sites in Iran, killing four soldiers.
Honest promise or devastating emptiness? Beyond the ballet of mutual threats, reality is nuanced… under the command of the American maestro.
