The fragile balance between Israel and Iran

Editor's note: Wang Jin, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is the director of the Center of Israel Studies of the Northwest University in China. The article reflects the author's opinion and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

Israel's military action against Iran is a carefully calculated response following extensive political deliberations. On the one hand, domestic pressure in Israel for military retaliation against Iran remains strong. Iran's missile attack against Israel on October 1 fueled public calls for a swift, large-scale military response.

However, due to various influencing factors, the operation has been delayed, leading to significant public dissatisfaction. In mid-October, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated clearly that the retaliation would occur before the U.S. presidential election, setting a definitive timeline for the military operation.

From a security perspective, Israel needs to carefully evaluate the potential intensity of an Iranian counterattack following any strike. During the large-scale Iranian missile attack on October 1, Israel's multi-layered air defense system – comprising the "Arrow," "David's Sling" and "Iron Dome" systems – failed to effectively intercept the incoming missiles. Before launching an attack on Iran, Israel must consider Iran's possible means of retaliation, especially the potential of another large-scale missile assault.

Neither Israel nor Iran is willing to escalate the military conflict. Leading local media outlets, such as Ynet and Israel Hayom, described Israel's retaliatory operation as a "victory," claiming it inflicted significant severe casualties on Iran. Meanwhile, Iranian mainstream media reported that Iran had successfully defended against the Israeli attack with minimal losses. Both sides aim to portray themselves as "victorious" through these media reports to appease domestic public opinion, demonstrating little willingness to escalate the military conflict.

Neither regional countries nor the U.S. are eager to prolong the military conflict. Nations including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Iraq and many others have all expressed a desire to ease regional tensions and avoid further escalation. The U.S. was quick to clarify that it is not directly involved in the military action against Iran and has expressed hope that the current conflict will come to an end.

Even though the current situation has eased, it does not guarantee that the conflict will gradually subside. In fact, there are still many uncertainties in the Middle East.

Firstly, belligerent rhetoric continues to dominate public opinion in both Israel and Iran. In Israel, public discourse online often criticizes Israel's military action as too weak, while Iranian hardliners argue that Iran's national security has been seriously humiliated by Israel's actions, demanding immediate retaliation. Therefore, the persistent presence of public sentiment in favor of war on both sides creates a significant risk of renewed conflict and further escalation between Israel and Iran in the future.

Secondly, within the Iranian-led "Axis of Resistance," there remains the possibility of destabilizing the regional situation. Iran's restrained response to Israeli attacks may not necessarily convince its allies, such as the Houthis in Yemen and the Shia militias in Syria and Iraq, to exercise the same level of caution.

In response to ongoing Israeli strikes on targets in Syria and Lebanon, these allies may retaliate against Israel, with their actions likely to be perceived by Israel as sanctioned by Iran. For example, the recent drone attack by Lebanese Hezbollah on the Israeli prime minister's private residence in Caesarea was considered by Israel to be inspired by Iran. Such attacks from Iran's allies increase the risk of renewed conflict.

Finally, a prolonged Israeli military campaign could further destabilize the region. Israel's military operations in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip continue, with intermittent strikes also occurring in Yemen, Iraq and Syria. In addition, Israel has not given up on targeting senior members of Hezbollah and Hamas, further fueling hardline rhetoric within Iran.

Although Israel and Iran may maintain a certain tacit understanding in their exchanges, the ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon, combined with the absence of timely and formal channels of communication between the two countries, make it unlikely that tensions in the Middle East will completely subside in the near future.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X, formerly Twitter, to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)