Three Questions That Arise From Iran's Attack On Israel

It will be no exaggeration to say that much of the world held its breath when Israel announced, late on Saturday evening local time, that Iran’s long-expected reprisal raids were underway, with hundreds of drones and missiles headed its way.

- MARY DEJEVSKY

The attack was unprecedented not just in its scale but in being, for the most part, launched directly from Iran. As such, it represented a new and immensely threatening stage, as a potential state-to-state conflict, rather than one conducted through proxies. No one – not Iran, not Israel, not the surrounding states, not the European countries and especially not the United States – was under any illusions about the possible consequences.

Modern reconnaissance and communications capacities meant that the awareness was widely shared, giving time – on the positive side – for those in the likely target zones to seek shelter but also for many, many more people in the region and beyond to chart, and dread, the approach of war in real time.

In the end, for those watching through the night or waking up to the news, the feared cataclysm was avoided. Israel’s defences, bolstered by US, French and UK air support, succeeded in disabling almost all the firepower unleashed by Iran. According to Israel, there was limited damage to an air base in the Negev desert, and one child was injured. At the barest minimum, this can be described as a major success for the defence of Israel and should, it must be hoped, avert, or at least delay, the much-feared regional conflagration.

Here, though, much of the certainty ends, and the questions begin – many of them doubtless being addressed at the emergency government and alliance meetings being held around the world today.