Ticking Clock: Israel's Response To Iran's Missile Attack

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, as reported by The Guardian, has suggested that Israel might conduct a major airstrike on Iran’s oil industry. He also mentioned a possible symbolic attack on a military site related to Iran’s nuclear program. Ehud Barak stated that Israel will definitely respond militarily to Iran’s attack on October 1st. Iran launched over 180 ballistic missiles; most were intercepted, but some hit areas near crowded places and Israeli military bases.

In an interview with The Guardian, Barak explained that Israel feels it must respond to the attack. The idea is that no independent country would ignore such an incident. The former prime minister, who also served as defense minister, foreign minister, and army chief, mentioned that Israel's response might be similar to recent airstrikes on Houthi-controlled sites in Yemen. These strikes targeted oil facilities, power plants, and docks in the Yemeni port of  Hodeidah after the Houthis launched missiles at the international airport near Tel Aviv.

We might witness a similar response, possibly a large-scale attack that could happen multiple times, according to Barak. Joe Biden mentioned on Thursday, 3rd October, that Washington had discussed a potential Israeli attack on Iran's oil sector. However, he didn't provide details or clarify if the U.S. would support it.

Barak, now 82, mentioned that some in Israel suggested using this opportunity to target Iran’s nuclear facilities in response to the attack. However, he believes it wouldn't significantly delay Iran’s nuclear program. From 2007 to 2013, while serving as defense minister under both Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu, Barak was a strong advocate for bombing Iran's nuclear facilities. He tried, without success, to persuade Presidents George Bush and Barack Obama to support the campaign with U.S. military force.

On Wednesday, October 2nd, Biden, like Obama before him, expressed his opposition to Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Barak now acknowledges that Iran's nuclear program is too advanced for a bombing campaign to make a significant impact. Some commentators and even people within the defense establishment have questioned why they shouldn't target the nuclear military program.

About a decade ago, the possibility of delaying Iran's nuclear program by several years seemed realistic, and I was one of the strongest advocates for considering this seriously, Barak explained. He argued that this isn't possible now because Iran is essentially a threshold (near-nuclear) country. Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon yet. It might take a year to develop one and up to five years to build a small arsenal. Realistically, it's difficult to significantly delay their progress.

In a 2015 nuclear agreement, Tehran agreed to strict limits on uranium enrichment and other program elements in exchange for relief from sanctions. However, this deal has been unraveling (falling apart) since the U.S. withdrew under Donald Trump in 2018. Iran now has a stockpile of enriched uranium that's 30 times above the 2015 agreement limit. It is enriching uranium up to 60% purity, which is very close to the 90% needed for weapons-grade material.

Under the 2015 agreement, Iran would need at least a year to make a nuclear bomb. Now, it could take just a few weeks. Barak thinks there is pressure within Netanyahu's government to carry out at least a symbolic strike against Iran's program. However, he considers such an action pointless. Some planners might see causing some damage as worth the risk, since the alternative is to do nothing, Barak explained. It's likely there will be an attempt to target certain nuclear-related sites.

Barak believes a strong Israeli military response to Iran's recent attack is necessary and justified. However, he thinks that the move toward a regional war could have been avoided if Netanyahu had supported a U.S. plan to gather Arab backing for a new Palestinian government in Gaza to replace Hamas. Instead, Israel's current prime minister opposed any plan for a political solution that recognized Palestinian sovereignty after the conflict.

"I believe a strong response is unavoidable now. That doesn't mean it was destined to happen a year ago, Barak explained. There were likely several chances to prevent this conflict from becoming a major Middle East clash. Netanyahu refused to discuss plans for what happens after the conflict, for reasons that aren't clear."

"Barak said he doesn't blame Netanyahu entirely for the situation. He believes the main fault lies with Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran supporting them. However, we must act based on a clear understanding of the situation, opportunities, and limitations. An old Roman saying goes, "If you don’t know which port you want to reach, no wind will take you there," Barak mentioned.

(The author of this article is an Aerospace & Defence Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany)

(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own and do not reflect those of DNA)