Inevitable escalation between Iran and Israel?

The place, the capital of Iran. The time, the inauguration of the new Iranian president. The target, the head of the Hamas political bureau. Nothing was left to chance in the strike that killed Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on Wednesday, July 31. This retaliation by Israel against one of the architects of the October 7 massacres comes less than a day after another attack in the heart of Beirut, Lebanon, killed Fouad Chokr, one of the senior commanders of Hezbollah – an Islamist political and paramilitary group allied with Iran – as well as four civilians, two women and two children. Two major setbacks in less than twenty-four hours for Iran. In response, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic, vowed to inflict a “severe punishment” to Israel.

So what will his answer be? “This attack is a snub, a humiliation for the Revolutionary Guards. (elite body and close guard of the Iranian power). To wash away the affront, the risk of escalation is real, but we must keep in mind that since October 7, Tehran has carefully avoided a head-on conflict with Israel,” says Didier Billion, vice-director of the Institute of International and Strategic Relations (IRIS). In fact, the country is economically weakened by the multiple Western sanctions in response to its human rights violations, its nuclear proliferation activities and its military support for the war led by Russia against Ukraine. Internally, the Mullahs’ regime has also been destabilized by the death of the President of the Islamic Republic, Ebrahim Raïssi., and his foreign minister on May 19, 2024, in a helicopter crash in the northwest of the country.

“Although a massive military response is far from being the most likely hypothesis, Iranian leaders have a range of possible responses to Israeli interests, particularly through their allies in the region,” continued Didier Billion. From Hezbollah in northern Lebanon, to the Houthis in Yemen, to Hamas in the Gaza Strip, the fronts to be held are multiple for the Hebrew state. A possible direct involvement of Iran in a response, however, makes many observers fear a “regionalization of the conflict.”

Aware of the risks of conflagration, the European Union calls on “all parties” to show “the greatest restraint” . For its part, the UN has urgently convened its Security Council. Its Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, believes that “the attacks (…) seen in southern Beirut and Tehran represent a dangerous escalation, at a time when all efforts should instead lead to a ceasefire in Gaza.”

The ball is in Iran’s court

“The whole question is who has an interest in the conflict widening. These two assassinations demonstrate the Israeli authorities’ strategy of escalation,” observes Emmanuel Dupuy, president of the Institute for Prospective and Security in Europe (IPSE). If the death of the political leader of Hamas is not a surprise, as Mossad – the Israeli intelligence service – had made it a dead man walking (“death on probation”) since October 7, the choice to assassinate him in Tehran is an unprecedented snub.

Did the Hebrew state act alone in deciding to eliminate Ismail Haniyeh? This is in any case what Anthony Blinken, the American Secretary of State, claims. “We were not aware of it, and we are not involved,” he said in an interview with the television channel Channel NewsAsia, during a trip to Singapore. But two days before this attack, Benjamin Netanyahu was in Washington, after his appearance before the American Congress, to discuss with his main financial and military supporter. At the same time, the director of the Mossad, David Barnea, met, in Rome, the director of the CIA William Burns, during a summit to negotiate a ceasefire and the release of the hostages still held by Hamas in the Gaza Strip. “This attack and its timing give the impression that the Americans have authorized Israel to strike on Iranian soil. It is difficult to believe that they were not aware of this, given that the potential consequences of a response from Iran would directly implicate their forces present in the region,” underlines Emmanuel Dupuy.

The ball is now in Iran’s court. A frontal response from the regime from its territory towards Israel would expose it to an open war, something it has refused since 1979. “Initially, we must expect a certain response from its allies in the region,” continues Emmanuel Dupuy. The Ezzedine Al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, have already promised to “take the war to another level, with enormous consequences for the entire region.” “Difficult days await us (…) but we are ready,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already warned.