Residents of western Iran were jolted awake by the sound of explosions early Sunday morning, which local officials later attributed to wargames conducted by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) amid escalating tensions with Israel.
Following repeated threats from Iranian officials to avenge the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, the Islamic Republic is apparently holding a series of military exercises amid fears of a full-blown war with Israel.
Morad Babakhani, the political deputy governor of Qasr-e Shirin in Kermanshah province confirmed that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has been conducting military drills from August 9 to 13.
Babakhani sought to reassure local residents by linking the sound of explosions to the exercises, claiming there was "no reason for concern." However, the reassurances do little to mask the broader implications of the IRGC's maneuvers.
Preparing for war or training Russian personnel?
A new NOTAM issued on Saturday warned pilots to avoid flying over an area near Iran's Nojeh air base in Hamadan due to scheduled gunfire from August 11 to 14. It is not yet clear if the NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) issued for Hamadan air base is connected to the Sunday wargames, but the warning might suggest a scenario that is not much relevant to the ongoing Iran-Israel tension, but to the ongoing conflict in Europe.
Reuters reported on Friday that dozens of Russian personnel are being trained in Iran to use the Fat’h-360 close-range ballistic missile system.
In 2016, Iran granted Russia permission to conduct air operations in Syria from the same airbase in Hamadan, and it seems a likely scenario that the Russian personnel are using the Nojeh airbase again, this time for training purposes.
In the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict, Russia has tried to remain neutral and publicly called for restraint from both sides. However, according to a report by The New York Times on Monday, Iranian officials claim Russia has begun delivering advanced air defense and radar equipment to Iran following Tehran's request for these arms, increasing Tehran's preparedness for a possible war with Israel.
A dangerous game: Tehran’s aggressive posturing
Iran and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas have accused Israel of killing Haniyeh on July 31. While Israel has neither confirmed nor denied responsibility for the killing, the incident has heightened fears that the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip could escalate into a broader conflict across the Middle East.
The IRGC's military exercises come at a particularly precarious time. According to an exclusive report by Iran International, President Masoud Pezeshkian has recently met with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to plead with him to avoid direct military action against Israel. Pezeshkian reportedly warned Khamenei that any such move could provoke Israeli retaliation, targeting Iran’s critical infrastructure and energy resources.
The potential consequences are dire: a full-blown conflict that could cripple Iran's already struggling economy and possibly lead to the clerical rulers’ collapse. Yet, despite the warnings and the calls for restraint, the Islamic Republic appears intent on escalating the situation. It has threatened to launch direct missile strikes on Israel in response to Haniyeh's assassination, a move that would almost certainly trigger a response from Tel Aviv.
Global pressure and diplomatic efforts
In recent days, international diplomatic efforts have intensified to dissuade Tehran from following through on its threats. The Guardian reported on Thursday that the Islamic Republic might be reconsidering the scale and nature of its retaliatory attack against Israel, largely due to significant diplomatic pressure aimed at preventing civilian casualties.
However, the lack of explicit support from Islamic countries for Tehran's military response does not seem to have deterred Iran. Reports from The Telegraph indicate that while the IRGC is pushing for a missile strike on Tel Aviv, Pezeshkian has suggested targeting Israeli-affiliated sites in Azerbaijan or Iraqi Kurdistan as an alternative, with prior notification to those countries.
Simultaneously, Politico reported that the Biden administration has been working through diplomatic channels to persuade Tehran to reconsider its plans for a military attack on Israel. US officials have warned Iran that a large-scale assault would only escalate tensions and increase the likelihood of a direct confrontation between the two nations.
The reality of escalation
Despite the diplomatic efforts, the situation on the ground suggests that Tehran is preparing for another serious escalation. On the evening of April 13, the Islamic Republic launched an unprecedented attack on Israel, using over 300 cruise and ballistic missiles and drones. This marked the first direct assault by Iran on Israeli soil, signaling a shift from the years-long shadow war between the two countries to open confrontation.
Israel’s response was swift and decisive. On the morning of April 19, Israeli forces targeted a military base in Isfahan, underlining their readiness to retaliate against Iranian aggression.
General Joseph Votel retired four-star US Army General and commander of US Centcom from March 2016 to 2019 and now Senior Fellow on National Security at MEI, and Firas Maksad Senior Director for Strategic Outreach and Senior Fellow, MEI were the speakers. They laid out the implications of the most recent rise in hostilities between Israel and Iran and its affiliated proxies. Also discussed were scenarios of Israel's strategic assessments, the risk of the US being drawn into a broader regional conflict, and the aftermath of Haniyeh's death on Hamas' future.
In his opening comments Firas Maksad said: “Israel has successfully gained escalation dominance in this conflict; essentially projecting out to the world and warring parties that it is ready to take the next step up the escalatory ladder, should it come to it. Iran and Hezbollah have lost quite a bit of their deterrence, as their response on April 13th was not enough to pause,” he added: “I think in fact the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been quite successful in putting both Iran and Hezbollah in a Catch 22 type situation. A policy dilemma.”
Maksad described the closing ring on fire that Iran and its proxies have established around Israel and that it is very real. This is a strategic argument that can be made for a war by Israel. Politically, Netanyahu is embattled, his political future hangs in the balance and many in Israel will say that [Netanyahu] doesn’t have much of an interest in reaching a ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza and he is at odd with most of his intelligence and security chiefs who believe that a deal can be had.” He added: “The answer to the million-dollar question as to whether Netanyahu is looking for a broader war; there are many reasons and justifications as to why the answer to that might be yes.”
He outlined three potential scenarios:
1. Limited Response: The least likely scenario involves a coordinated but fairly limited response from Iran and Hezbollah. Back-channel diplomacy, such as efforts by the Jordanian prime minister, has emphasized de-escalation and warned Tehran that Jordan would prohibit the passage of Iranian missiles and drones through its airspace. Saudi Arabia has reportedly conveyed a similar message to Iran.
2. Escalated Conflict from Lebanon: The second scenario, which may be the most likely, involves increased missile fire from Lebanon. Given Lebanon's proximity to Israel, this incoming fire would be harder to block. Hezbollah possesses over 1,000 missiles, many equipped with precision-guided kits, and the US and its allies might not have the same advance warning as they did on April 13. In this case, Israel would likely retaliate strongly, potentially launching a major operation into Lebanon.
3. Wider Regional Conflict: The third and most catastrophic scenario involves Iran following through on its repeated promises to defend Hezbollah if Israel launches a major offensive. Hezbollah is Iran’s most significant foreign investment, with over 40 years and billions of dollars spent on arming, training, and equipping what is considered the most formidable non-state military actor in the world. As Hezbollah serves as a first line of defense for Iran's nuclear program, this scenario could lead to a much broader and more devastating conflict.
In his opening comments Votel pointed out that US influence in the region has diminished which is not unexpected. He explained: “Our desire to put more focus on the Pacific and to reduce our presence in the Middle East which was done to large extent through cessation of operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, though there are still 2500 troops on in the region.”
He emphasized that Iran’s response will not be limited to actions in the Levant and that the IRGC’s global network can exact costs in other parts of the world.
Maksad argued that Hezbollah does not want to see an escalation of the conflict. Given the events of the last week, Lebanon is no longer a secondary front and in danger of becoming the primary front. He explained that there are many reasons why Hezbollah does not want to fight a head on war with Israel. The most important reason being that Hezbollah’s primary sponsor does not want to see it spent in such a war and wants to keep that power in case of any potential Israeli attack on Iran proper. Lebanon is still staggering from the financial collapse of 2019 and the Shia community in Lebanon does not want to see a war that could be devastating for Beirut being fought for Palestinians and Hamas.
A viewer asked: What are the chances and the consequences of the war spreading to the entire region and the GCC, impacting energy flow through the strait of Hormuz. Votel replied saying that it will certainly impact shipping, market and insurance prices and will have an overall decrease of the movement of goods out of the region.
Maksad and Votel who have recently returned from touring countries in the region, including the CENTCOM facilities in the area. Maksad argued that it is unescapable for the GCC countries not to be impacted. According to Maksad, Saudi Arabia is laser focused on Yemen, the Houthis and their participation in any forthcoming escalation. The regional countries have done their utmost to sit this war out which is very difficult for them. The Red Sea is vital and so much of what the Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman, envisioned, into turning the country into a logistical trade hub by 2030 whose logistical trade is around the Red Sea through which 15% of the global commerce goes through. The UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia are firm US partners and allies, but they cannot continue to hedge if the issue expands into the Persian Gulf as well.
Maksad argued that if the reports of the their readiness of providing Iran with a significant air defense as possible, such as the S400 to help defend against incoming Israeli attacks, will underscore what many including Maksad and Votel have said all along to the Biden administration which is it is not possible to push back against Russia and the rise of China and not be involved in the Middle East. Russia is stepping back in in a significant way and this will give credence to not only the Israeli argument but other American allies in the region, that America needs to be more involved.