Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, has denied that US pressure prevented Israel from attacking Iranian oil and gas facilities.
President Joe Biden’s administration sent an urgent message to Israel on October 1, just hours after Iranian missiles descended on the country: Take a breath.
Washington contended that Israel was in control of the clock and had time to determine the best course of action in response to an Iranian strike that the US estimated could have killed thousands of people had Israel, backed by US military assistance, failed to repel the attack from its longstanding adversary.
Officials feared that such a massive Iranian attack could lead to a swift and severe Israeli response, which could accelerate the Middle East towards a full-scale regional conflict just weeks before the US presidential election.
The United States attempted to exert pressure on Israel for over three weeks before its military finally retaliated on Saturday with airstrikes that were far more aimed at military targets than Washington first feared, as this account from current and former US officials explains.
They weakened Iran’s military by demolishing important missile production and air defence installations. They met Biden’s two main demands, however, by avoiding Iran’s energy infrastructure and sensitive nuclear sites.
“US pressure was critically important,” said Jonathan Panikoff, a former deputy US national intelligence officer for the Middle East.
“Had the Biden administration not taken action to pressure Israel not to strike nuclear or energy sites, Israeli decision-making would have been very different.”
Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, has denied that US pressure prevented Israel from attacking Iranian oil and gas facilities.
He asserted that “Israel selected the attack targets ahead of time based on its national interests rather than American directives.”
According to officials, the first action taken by Biden’s administration was to admit that Iran would be held accountable for the October 1 attack.
One senior Biden administration official stated, “We promised serious consequences for Iran in the hours after that attack.”
Since October 1, US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin and Israeli counterpart Yoav Gallant have spoken on the phone about a dozen times. Gallant and Austin, a former four-star Army general, would talk about the potential reaction.
Regarding Austin’s discussions with Gallant, one US official stated, “We knew they were getting ready to do something, and he was pushing for it to be proportional.”
In the days following Iran’s October 1 attack, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, like other top administration officials, worked the phones, telling European and Arab allies that Israel would have to respond but that Washington was trying to calibrate it.
However, how might a proportionate response prevent another Iranian attack?
The only fatality from Iran’s October 1 strike was a Palestinian who was killed by falling debris, but neither Israeli nor American air defences were able to intercept many of Iran’s missiles.
An examination of satellite imagery revealed at least 30 impacts at Israel’s Nevatim Airbase alone, according to Jeffrey Lewis, a non-proliferation specialist at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.
Lewis said that could indicate that Israel was either attempting to preserve its dwindling air defences or simply believed that repairing the hardened facility would be less costly than retaliating for every Iranian projectile.
According to Lewis, “Israel may have determined that interceptors were simply too costly to use on ballistic missiles or that the stockpiles were running low.”
AIR DEFENCES
One US official stated that Iran’s nuclear and oil sites were among the possible targets when the administration first began negotiating with the Israelis, but he emphasised that Israel had not made up its mind to pursue these targets.
But US officials worked to present an alternative option that included a set of different measures: Washington sought to impose oil sanctions on Iran’s so-called “Ghost Fleet” in order to provide an alternative to the Israelis’ plan to use kinetic strikes to harm Iran’s oil revenues.
According to the top Biden administration official, the US attempted to strengthen Israel’s air defences before its attack on Iran on Saturday. This includes a unique US deployment of roughly 100 US soldiers to operate the Terminal High Altitude Area Defence system, or THAAD, in Israel.
The United States wanted to know Israel’s attack plans before implementing the system.
According to officials, the THAAD deployment was made possible by Biden’s October 9 call with Netanyahu, which provided the US with insight into the nature of the Israeli response.
Gulf states emphasised their neutrality as Iran threatened to target Israel’s supporters in retaliation for any Israeli strike.
Saudi Arabia has been wary of an Iranian strike on its oil facilities since a 2019 attack on its key refinery at Abqaiq briefly shut down more than 5% of global oil supply. Iran denied any role.
To address Israel’s desire to punish Iran’s oil sector, the Biden administration rolled out sanctions. Among them was the extension of US sanctions against Iran’s petrochemical and petroleum industries on October 11.
Other important components of this “package” of alternative measures included demonstrating to the world that the United States had Israel’s back and encouraging the European allies to penalise Iran Air while simultaneously deploying the THAAD system as a deterrent.
According to officials, the administration contended that this option would still be a potent deterrent and effective in imposing costs on Iran without drawing the region into a larger conflict that Washington felt Israel did not want.
Nuclear No-Go
The US military also used long-range B-2 stealth bombers to strike the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, which many analysts interpreted as a message to Iran.
At the time, Austin claimed that the strike was a singular example of the Pentagon’s capacity to hit targets that are difficult to access, “no matter how deeply buried underground, hardened, or fortified.”
Washington told Israel that it could rely on its assistance if Tehran ever decided to develop a nuclear weapon, something the US intelligence community does not think it has done yet, as rumours circulated about whether Israel might attack Iran’s nuclear sites.
This was not the moment.
According to Panikoff, “the implication was that they would have to be more measured this time if they want US help to destroy such targets—if a decision is made to do so—in the long term.”
In a region already reeling from a year-old conflict in Gaza between Israel and Iran-backed Hamas and an intensifying conflict between Israel and Lebanese Hezbollah, another Iranian ally, Blinken believes that a well-planned Israeli counterattack against Iran could pave the way for long-elusive diplomatic objectives.
During a trip to the Middle East last week, Blinken told Arab foreign ministers that US discussions with Israel had gotten to a place where Israel will only strike military targets. In a message he hoped would reach Tehran, Blinken said Iran should not do anything else.
As the attack came to an end on Sunday, neither side indicated that it would escalate further. Netanyahu claimed that his airstrikes “hit hard” at Iran’s missile manufacturing and defences. According to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the extent of Saturday’s attack’s damage should not be overstated.
The Biden administration put a lot of effort into creating a chance to end the extraordinary cycle of direct attacks and counterattacks that started in April, but it is impossible to predict whether Israel and Iran will de-escalate.
“If Iran chooses to respond once again, we will be ready, and there will be consequences for Iran once again. But we do not want that to occur,” the top Biden administration official stated.
Opposition Republicans in the United States, such as Republican congressman Mike Turner, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, are among those who oppose Biden’s strategy of attempting to restrain Israel.
Turner told Fox News, “They have limited Israel’s ability to really impact Iran and its ability to continue to threaten Israel.”
The outcome of the back-and-forth strikes, according to Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is paradoxically an increase in Israel’s potential risk tolerance, which could grow even more if Republican candidate and former US President Donald Trump wins the presidential election on November 5.
Miller stated, “Now that they have shown that they can get away with dismantling Iran’s air defence systems and basically doing a good deal of damage, I think that if Trump wins this election, the Israelis may even look for opportunities in the months ahead.”