Now it’s up to Israel: De-escalate or retaliate against Iran?

Disaster was narrowly averted on Saturday night in the long-standing conflict between Israel and Iran. Israel, aided by the United States and other allies, successfully repelled a massive Iranian drone and missile strike. But the reprieve might be short-lived.

The latest round of hostilities began Oct. 7, when Hamas, a terrorist organization funded and armed by Iran, launched a barbaric attack on Israel. Israel responded by first bombing and then invading the Gaza Strip. Six months later, Israeli forces continue to battle Hamas in Gaza, with Palestinian civilians suffering devastating damage as Hamas hides among them.

Iran did not launch a full-scale war of its own after Oct. 7, despite what must have been Hamas leaders’ hopes, but Iran’s proxies in Hezbollah opened steady rocket and missile fire from southern Lebanon into northern Israel, forcing roughly 60,000 Israelis from their homes. The Houthis, another Iranian-backed militia, began attacking international shipping in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. Other Iranian-backed militia opened fire on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria. While U.S. forces retaliated against Iranian proxies for attacks on U.S. bases, Israel has kept up a series of strikes against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon while also continuing to target Hezbollah’s Iranian supply lines in Syria.

On April 1, Israel upped the ante by bombing the Iranian consulate in Damascus. The dead included two senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) generals and several other officers. This airstrike was no doubt intended to put pressure on Iran to end the Hezbollah attacks on Israel, but this public humiliation — which included the destruction of a diplomatic facility that is technically sovereign Iranian territory — backed the mullahs into a corner. From Tehran’s perspective, retaliation became necessary to save face both with its own public and with its regional allies.

Iran’s attack was large and unprecedented, it had little chance of success in the face of Israel’s multilayered air defenses, buttressed by support from the United States, Jordan, Britain, France and other friendly states. Israel announced that 99 percent of the Iranian projectiles were intercepted, and the damage was minimal.

The mullahs must have known that this would be the likely outcome. This attack was reminiscent of the Iranian missile strike on two U.S. bases in Iraq after the U.S. killing of the IRGC’s Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani in early 2020, which also inflicted no fatalities — and prompted no U.S. retaliation. Both attacks were performative acts designed to make a statement, not to inflict mass casualties.

On Saturday, the Iranians could have tried to overwhelm Israel air defenses by directing Hezbollah to unleash its arsenal of some 150,000 missiles. Given Hezbollah’s geographical proximity to Israel, the flight times would have been short and Israel would have had little time to prepare. But that’s not what the mullahs did. They opted for an attack launched mainly from Iranian soil, giving Israel and its allies plenty of time to activate their own defenses.

The Iranians are no more eager for a bigger war with Israel than Israel is eager for a bigger war with Iran.

More From The Washington Post (subscription required):