Overnight strikes in Lebanon and Iran targeting key “Axis of Resistance” figures will elicit a sizable and coordinated response on Israel by Iran and its allies.
Any response is expected to take at least a few days to organize, but is likely to involve a simultaneous, multi front attack on Israel that again raises the risk of miscalculation and conflagration. These latest events will alter the ongoing negotiation process for a ceasefire in Gaza; while Israel may have more room to maneuver on a deal, the same cannot be said now for other parties to the talks, including Hamas, which lost its main in interlocutor in the strikes.
Over the course of the past day, two strikes killed significant leaders in the so-called “Axis of Resistance”: the first was an Israeli airstrike in Beirut’s southern suburbs that targeted the most senior Hezbollah military commander Fuad Shukr, the right-hand man to the group’s secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah; the second was a strike (allegedly by Israel, though not officially claimed) in Tehran that took out Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas and the group’s main interlocutor for negotiators in ceasefire talks. Earlier that day, Haniyeh had attended the inauguration of Iran’s new president Masoud Pezeshkian. The head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, another group involved in 7 October that took Israeli hostages, was in the same building as Haniyeh but survived the strike.
Expectations for an Iranian Response
In the hours that followed, there was significant speculation about the scale of a possible response, primarily by Iran but by Hezbollah too. The attack will be viewed by Iran as embarrassing and considerably more escalatory than the Israeli airstrike in April on the Iranian consulate in Damascus that killed two top commanders from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). This was a strike directly on Iranian soil that assassinated a key Iranian ally – the perceived threat level to Iran is surely higher.
It is important to level-set: it continues to be the official position of Iran and the US, and other regional countries for that matter, that no one wants to be dragged into a far wider and more destructive conflict. To this end, Iran is expected to respond against Israel in a manner similar to its telegraphed “Operation True Promise” retaliatory strike in April that in total simultaneously launched hundreds of ballistic missiles, drones, and cruise missiles. While these were nearly entirely thwarted by Israel’s multi-layered air defense system and with US and regional support, the defense operation came at a cost of more than USD 1bn. A next response could be larger in magnitude and possibly with more advanced weaponry.
In remarks today, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin reiterated Washington’s commitment to helping defend Israel if it is attacked in the wake of these strikes, and his continued belief that a wider war in the region is not inevitable.
In terms of the timing of any response, it is unclear. Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah are still assessing the totality of the strikes, the anticipated fallout, and succession plans to replace these central figures. However, Iran is likely to take its time to assess its strategy. Given Israeli strikes targeted key figures from across the “Axis of Resistance,” any response will likely unleash a multi front set of attacks on Israel with all actors firing at once. At the very least, a response is unlikely until the designated three days of mourning for Haniyeh in Iran are complete.
Ceasefire Dynamics will now Change
As Teneo previously laid out, the past few weeks had created the best possible conditions in the current Gaza conflict to establish a ceasefire deal. However, the tide appeared to shift after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington from 22-25 July. In his address to Congress, Netanyahu vowed for a “total victory” against Hamas. This is widely understood to be the elimination of Hamas leadership to sufficiently weaken the group and prevent its regrouping. To date, Israeli forces have killed the founder of Qassam Brigades, the Hamas military wing, in Beirut in January, and are believed to have likely killed Mohammed Deif, the head of Qassam Brigades, in Gaza earlier in July, although this remains unconfirmed. With Haniyeh now killed, one of the remaining figures is perhaps one considered by Israel to be the most treacherous, the mastermind of Hamas – Yahya Sinwar. It is unclear what constitutes “total victory,” but certainly he remains a significant target.
The actions of the past 24 hours will surely alter the dynamics of a ceasefire negotiation on Gaza. While largely expected to proceed due to US lawmakers’ persistent efforts — including during the Israeli delegation visit to Washington last week — the talks are highly susceptible to developments on the military front. This was evidenced most recently by the 27 July rocket strike in Majdal Shams in the Golan Heights that killed about a dozen children and which Israeli and US officials blamed on Hezbollah. The attack happened just a day before the ceasefire negotiating parties were due to meet in Rome to attempt to advance ongoing talks.
Regional politics and allegiances will play a critical role too. While Netanyahu may have more room to negotiate a ceasefire deal and hostage/prisoner exchange following these overnight strikes, the same cannot be said of other parties. With Iranian territory directly targeted, Iran could be expected to try to exert more influence on the negotiations. The same can be said of Turkey. President Erdogan has publicly displayed friendly relations with Hamas leaders and previously welcomed Haniyeh to Turkey as recently as April. Qatar has condemned the strikes, highlighting the difficulties of continuing with negotiations when the main Hamas interlocutor has been killed. An early agreement on hostages will be impossible, and Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas will have to show they will not give in to Israeli pressure.
As the dust settles in Tehran and the southern suburbs of Beirut, the risk of more violent and regional confrontation has grown. A retaliation is expected, and as always this raises the risk of miscalculation or conflagration depending on the shape and magnitude of any response and the threat it is estimated to pose to Israel, the US, and other US regional partners.
