We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Iran attacks Israel
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here, and a Quick Take on a Sunday, which usually means something is not going well, and that is certainly the case in the Middle East, where you had unprecedented strikes by Iran and its proxies against Israel.
Now, on the one hand, clearly a very dangerous thing to do, on the other hand, could have been a hell of a lot worse. What do I mean by that? Well, it is not World War III. Americans warned Iran not to hit the United States, and the Iranians gave a heads-up, days in advance, through a number of actors, most importantly through Iraq. This reminds me very much of after the American servicemen and women, three were killed in Jordan, by an Iranian proxy. The Americans did not want a war to break out with the Iranians directly, waited about a week, gave a heads up through Iraq, of the kind of attack that the Americans were planning, waited four days, gave the Iranians a chance to basically prepare and get their own forces out, and warned them that if this were to happen again, there would be direct consequences, a direct strike on Iran itself.
In this case, you had the Iranian heads-up that gave the Americans and allies time to pre-position, to provide diplomatic support, both publicly and privately, to the Israelis. Send the head of CENTCOM to Israel, say that American support for Israel was ironclad, help ensure that the Israelis would be able to most effectively defend itself against the coming Iranian attack. That was, on the one hand, a really big deal by the Iranians that was meant to be a maximal display of force and a minimum likelihood of casualties. But still, there was a significant possibility of accident, that you could have a risk that would lead to a war directly between Iran and Israel. Something that the Americans desperately wanted to avoid because it would bring the US in. It would spike oil prices. It would probably mean the end of Biden's, potential of a second presidency. And it, of course, would also mean that Iran was going to get hit massively by the United States and Israel, something they wanted to avoid.
We saw hundreds of drones and ballistic missiles, many from proxies, but many from Iran itself, over 99% of which were taken down. And they were aimed solely at military targets in Israel. So again, lots of effort to try to reduce the risk but the potential that you would have had a number get through, accidentally hitting civilians or having significant military hit, that was a risk that the Iranians were prepared to take. So, it's a big deal, it’s a clear escalation, and it is certainly an effort by the Iranians to say, that if this is to happen again, that the likelihood that there will be a major war between Iran and Israel come what may, is very real. And the Iranians also said, and they said this before the missiles even hit their targets, or in the case of the vast majority of them were intercepted, said through the United Nations mission that this was directly in retaliation for the Israeli strike against an Iranian leader in Damascus, and that the matter, from Iran's perspective, should be considered closed.
In other words, no further attacks were coming. So, trying to in a sense, you know, reduce the likelihood of further escalation, in advance. And clearly, all of that kept the United States from responding directly. So, the US strategy here is do everything possible to show that you will get massive support for Israeli defense and national security in the event of an attack, any attack, but also to try to put maximum constraint on the Israeli government against a response directly against Iran, and that the Americans don't want to support Israel if they were to engage in offensive attacks against Iran at this point.
What are the Israelis going to do? I mean, the hope for the United States is that while Prime Minister Netanyahu wants to do more and suck the United States into a broader war against Iran, that he is going to be constrained from doing so. In part because he was so successful, they now have a major victory on their belt under his watch, being able to defend the Israeli people completely in response to an unprecedented Iranian attack. And there's also going to be a big distraction away from the war in Gaza. Doesn't mean that Israel suddenly loses its isolation or wins the PR war globally, I think that's certainly not going to happen, but, there's less pressure on the Israelis, on the prime minister, in terms of Gaza right now as a consequence of what Iran has done. And there's also less pressure for Netanyahu to be forced out domestically in the near, in the immediate future.
Further, if he were to try to go considerably farther than Benny Gantz wants to, and the war cabinet wants to, in a response against Iran, then Netanyahu risks that they would bolt from the war cabinet and that his government would then fall apart. That's certainly a proximate risk that contains what the Israelis are likely to do. I don't think they'll sit on their hands and do nothing. At the very least, I think there'll be more significant strikes against Iranian proxies in the coming days. And the Israelis will also continue to engage in strikes against Iranian targets as they see them, as is opportune, in proxy states going forward. This is the problem, of course, is that, even though you have averted major escalation in a very dangerous period over the weekend, the Israelis and the Iranians haven't accomplished anything to stabilize their relationship longer-term.
Israel has shown that they are capable of taking out Iranian leaders in Syria, and Iran can't defend them. Iran has no intention of suddenly leaving those proxies to fend for themselves. And further, the likelihood that Israel now gets a breakthrough agreement on hostage release by Hamas, and that leads to a ceasefire, has gone down, at least in the near-term. The other side of that is the likelihood that the Israelis proceed with at least some form of ground attack into Rafah, which the Americans have warned them not to, also has gone up.
So the Hamas war with Israel is nowhere close to ending, the likelihood of continued Palestinian civilian casualties continues to grow, and the potential for further military engagement, both vis-a-vis proxies, including the Houthis in the Red Sea, the fact that the Iranians have also boarded an Israeli linked vessel in the Red Sea and that there is no effective deterrent in place right now between Israel and Iran, despite all sorts of other actors not wanting this to expand into a broader war, that all makes the Middle East right now, more dangerous.
So, I mean, none of us know, what the next shoe is going to be to drop. But if you are looking ahead over the next, let's say, six months, a couple things I think you can say. First, it is more likely that the present Israeli government is going to be in place for longer, and that the war in Gaza is going to continue without a serious effort at stabilization, or at least not one that's consequential.
That's problematic for Biden as you look ahead to the election in November. The potential that this war expands and eventually does drag in the United States and Iran more directly, is also going up. It's not imminent but it is certainly reasonably plausible, and the guardrails on that war are becoming, they are eroding as both sides are taking shots against each other.
So, a dangerous environment. A second war that is not going the way the Americans or anyone else in the world would like it to. And that's how we're kicking off our week.
That's it for me and I'll talk to you all real soon.
- Iran launches ballistic missiles at Israel in revenge attack ›
- Islamic State group spoils efforts to blame Israel for deadly Iran blasts ›
- Israel's war in Gaza has emboldened Iran, says Karim Sadjadpour ›
- Who will Iran blame for deadly explosions near Soleimani’s grave? ›
- Biden’s Iran dilemma ›
- Will Iran attack Israel? ›
- Iran-Israel crisis: Dangers still high with little room for diplomacy - GZERO Media ›
- Israel attacks Iran - GZERO Media ›
Smoke rises after what the Iranian media said was an Israeli strike on a building close to the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Syria April 1, 2024.
Israel kills top Iranian commanders in Damascus
The freshly un-herniated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flexed some muscle beyond Israel’s borders on Monday, as an apparent IDF air strike flattened a section of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, killing several senior Iranian military figures responsible for proxy groups in Syria and Lebanon, as well as a handful of Iranian diplomats.
The strike marks an escalation between the Jewish State and the Islamic Republic. While Israel has conducted assassinations within Iran over the years and has struck a number of military targets belonging to Iran or its proxies in Syria and Lebanon in recent months, the strike on a diplomatic building was a particularly bold taunt of Tehran.
Iran said the strike suggested Netanyahu had lost his mind over his inability to master the Gaza situation — a colorful view that does little to mask a more black-and-white problem for the Supreme Leader and his generals: how to respond to a provocation like this without sliding into a direct conflict with Israel that Tehran has so far tried to avoid.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story said that the Israeli strike had flattened the entire Iranian consulate building, rather than just an annex of the building. We regret the error.
An Ethiopian family in search of food from fleeing remote villages where wells have dried up due to drought arrives in Korom, northeast Ethiopia.
Hard Numbers: Ethiopia is starving, US allies killed, Earth’s near miss, Paris parking drama, Myorkas impeachment vote
3,000,000: At least three million Ethiopians are at acute risk of hunger in the north of the country, where the federal government and ethnic Tigrayan separatists fought a grinding war from 2020 to 2022. The UK government says it is setting aside £100 million ($125.4 million) to aid people at risk of starvation in the region.
6: A drone attack early Monday killed six Kurdish fighters allied to the US on a military base housing US troops in Syria. No US deaths or injuries were reported, and the Biden administration says it will continue to target Iranian proxies in the region.
1,700,000: Did you feel that impending sense of doom over the weekend? It wasn’t (only) the Sunday Scaries. A skyscraper-sized meteorite is hurtling toward Earth and will come within just 1.7 million miles of our little blue marble on Friday. Scientists say we’ll be fine … but the asteroid is swinging back around in 2032.
18: The good people of Paris have voted to triple parking fees for SUVs, which will now run you €18 ($19.50) an hour in the city center and €12 further out. Mayor Anne Hidalgo celebrated the measure as an environmentalist victory – but at least one woman in the fashionable 8th arrondissement told Voice of America she’s sick of the mayor’s “diktats.”
2: The House will vote on whether to impeach Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, on charges that he has willfully refused to enforce border laws and breached the public trust. The vote marks an escalation of Republicans’ efforts to attack President Joe Biden and Democrats over immigration. Because of the GOP's thin majority, they can only afford to lose 2 lawmakers, but If they succeed, Mayorkas would become the only sitting cabinet member to be impeached in American history.
President Joe Biden attends the return of the remains of the three slain US soldiers — Sgt. Breonna Alexsondria Moffett, Sgt. William Jerome Rivers, and Sgt. Kennedy Ladon Sanders — at Dover Air Force Base on Friday.
US strikes back after deadly drone attack
Nearly a week after a drone attack killed three American service members at a small US base in Jordan, the US responded late Friday by launching strikes against more than 85 targets in Syria and Iraq. The Pentagon blames the Iran-backed Islamic Resistance in Iraq for the deadly drone attack.
The strikes hit command and intel centers and storage facilities affiliated with the Quds Force, a unit of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and local Iran-supported militias.
Tehran condemned the US strikes, calling them a “strategic error.” Baghdad said the attacks killed at least 16 people, including civilians. Syria, meanwhile, criticized the US and said the attacks would “fuel conflict in the Middle East in a very dangerous way.” The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based watchdog, said the strikes in Syria had killed 23 pro-Iran fighters, but no civilians.
The strikes came hours after President Joe Biden, first lady Dr. Jill Biden, and US Defense Sec. Lloyd Austin attended the return of the remains of the three slain US soldiers — Sgt. Breonna Alexsondria Moffett, Sgt. William Jerome Rivers, and Sgt. Kennedy Ladon Sanders — at Dover Air Force Base on Friday.
Biden had threatened to deliver a “tiered response” over time, so these strikes are expected to be just the first salvo of a broader campaign. We’ll be watching for Washington's next moves — and for any signs of escalation in the form of responses from Iran, Iraq, or Syria.
Iran thrives on Arab "misery," says expert Karim Sadjadpour
Whether it's Hamas in Gaza or Hezbollah in Lebanon or the Houthis in Yemen, how much control does Iran have over its proxy forces? According to Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace, Karim Sadjadpour, Iran tends not to micromanage these groups. Iran may not typically give direct, day-to-day instructions but instead defer to these leaders to make their own decisions. However, Sadjadpour adds, on a broader level, Iran wields significant influence as they are often the primary source of funding and military support for these groups.
More importantly, when it comes to the people under the control of these proxy forces, whether they be Palestinian, Iraqi, Syrian, Yemeni or Lebanese, Iran doesn't care about their wellbeing. Sadjadpour emphasizes that we must distinguish between Iran being anti-Israel and genuinely pro-Palestinian, for instance. He recalls a conversation with an Iranian official who suggested that Iran benefits from the instability and conflict in the region, as it furthers their interests.
"Iran really benefits from the misery of these populations and these failing states, and they don't want to see these populations become prosperous" Sadjadpour tells Ian Bremmer in the latest episode of GZERO World. " And so in some ways, the more these populations experience conflict, whether it's, you know, conflict amongst themselves or direct conflict with Israel, Iran has tended to benefit from the despair of these Arab populations."
Watch the full interview: What’s Iran’s next move?
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld or on US public television. Check local listings.
- What we know (and don't know) about Iran's role in the Israel-Hamas war ›
- US braces for Iran-backed blowback ›
- Fight between US and Iran’s proxies reaches boiling point ›
- Podcast: Iran's role in the Gaza war: is escalation inevitable? ›
- What’s Iran’s next move? ›
- US-Iran tensions complicate Biden's Middle East strategy - GZERO Media ›
Israel's war in Gaza has emboldened Iran, says Karim Sadjadpour
Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran's stance towards Israel and its Western allies has been nothing if not consistent, says Iran expert Karim Sadjadpour. In an extensive interview with Ian Bremmer for GZERO World, Sadjadpour emphasizes that Iran has consistently invested substantial resources in supporting militant groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah in an effort to undermine Israel. It's a continuation of Iran's long-term strategy to challenge the existence of Israel.
"Iran wants to defeat the US-led world order, evict the United States from the Middle East, and replace Israel with Palestine. There's perhaps been no government with a more consistent and enduring grand strategy than the Islamic Republic of Iran."
Israel's war with Gaza has only emboldened Iran, Sadjadpour argues. But it's not yet clear whether Iran will be so emboldened as to engage in an overt conflict with Israel or the United States.
Watch the full interview: What’s Iran’s next move?
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld or on US public television. Check local listings.
What’s Iran’s next move?
Remember that famous line from Bill Clinton’s campaign staffer James Carville back in 1992?: “It’s the economy, stupid!” As Israel’s war with Hamas escalates, it brings to mind—in a nasally Louisiana accent—the phrase “It’s Iran, stupid.”
Because, whether it’s the dizzying arsenal of Hezbollah rockets in southern Lebanon pointed at Israel, or the Houthi drones targeting Israel from Yemen, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard facilities in Eastern Syria-, one thing is clear: all roads lead back to the Ayatollah. And yet, there’s a big difference between skirmishes with proxy forces and an all-out US/Israel war with Iran.
"Iran feels particularly emboldened at the moment," says Iran expert Karim Sadjadpour, Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace, who joins Ian Bremmer on GZERO World. "Whether it's going after Israel via proxies or going after the US via their proxies. And they may be difficult to deter because they may either correctly read the situation that the US is not interested in a conflict, or they may misread it. And that could lead us to more direct conflict with Iran."
So how close is Iran to waging war on Israel, and its Western allies? Iran is, after all, a rogue nation well on its way to developing a nuclear weapon. And that’s an escalation that no one, including Iranian leadership, wants to see happen.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld or on US public television. Check local listings.
- Israel at war: How will regional actors respond? ›
- Ian Explains: How Israel & Iran went from friends to enemies ›
- US braces for Iran-backed blowback ›
- What we know (and don't know) about Iran's role in the Israel-Hamas war ›
- The proxy war (still) raging in Yemen ›
- Israel's war in Gaza has emboldened Iran, says Karim Sadjadpour - GZERO Media ›
- Iran thrives on Arab "misery", says expert Karim Sadjadpour - GZERO Media ›
- Ian Explains: How Hezbollah became so powerful in Lebanon - GZERO Media ›
A bomb disposal expert works at the scene after a bomb attack in Ankara, Turkey.
NATO battles: US shoots down Turkish drone in Syria
The US military on Thursday shot down a Turkish drone in northeast Syria, a remarkable development pitting two NATO states with an already complicated alliance against one another.
The Pentagon said that it warned Ankara several times beforehand that its hardware was too close to US troops stationed there, and that it made the decision to strike when the Turkish drone came within 500 meters of US personnel.
How’d we get here? As part of its decade-long mission to abolish the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, the US still has 900 troops operating in northern Syria. They work mainly with the Syrian Democratic Forces – a ragtag group of anti-regime militias including many Kurdish fighters.
Turkey, for its part, has long considered the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, known as the PKK, to be a terror group and has regularly launched operations in northern Syria aimed at rooting them out. What’s more, in recent days, Ankara has launched a fresh bombing campaign against Kurdish forces in Syria after a recent suicide bombing outside Turkey’s security headquarters in the capital – attributed to PKK members trained in Syria – killed two people.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said this week that PKK infrastructure and energy facilities in Syria and Iraq are “legitimate targets,” but the Pentagon came to believe that Turkey’s bombardment was imperiling US troops.
Washington is trying to de-escalate. US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said on Thursday that he’d spoken to his Turkish counterpart and emphasized that Washington understands Ankara’s “legitimate security concerns.”
The US, along with its EU partners, has been pushing in recent months for Ankara to give the greenlight to Sweden to join NATO. But Turkey says that’ll only happen when the US agrees to sell it F-16 fighter jets, something the US has so far refused to do in part because of disagreements over relations with Russia and … conflicting operations in Syria.
Relations between the US and Turkey were already very messy, particularly since 2019, when Ankara purchased Russian S-400 missile defense systems. This event will only generate more bad will.