The ongoing tensions between Israel and Iran, particularly concerning military strikes, have reached a new phase. In early October, Iran launched ballistic missiles at Israel, marking a significant escalation in hostilities. While Israel successfully defended against these attacks, speculation has risen about how Israel will respond, given its strategic capabilities and previous retaliatory measures.
Israel’s military strategy is based on its ability to strike targets across the Middle East. The Israeli Air Force (IAF) remains central to its ability to project power. With aircraft such as the F-15, F-16, and the more advanced F-35, Israel is capable of reaching targets over 2,000 kilometres away. This range places Iran within striking distance, making the IAF a key player in any future engagement.
In addition to air power, Israel’s navy also plays a crucial role. The fleet of Dolphin-class submarines provides a formidable underwater strike capability. These submarines can launch cruise missiles, and while there is speculation that some of these missiles may be nuclear, it is more likely that they carry conventional warheads. From their positions in the Red Sea or Persian Gulf, these submarines could launch attacks on Iranian military infrastructure. However, it is worth noting that while the naval capabilities are significant, they are seldom used openly in offensive operations, making their role more speculative.
A third potential avenue for Israeli retaliation involves the country’s Jericho missile system. These ballistic missiles, developed as part of Israel’s nuclear triad, have been shrouded in secrecy. While little is publicly known, it is believed that these missiles have been developed in several iterations, each with a longer range. However, given their potential nuclear capability, their use in conventional warfare remains unlikely, as it would be an expensive and excessive response to a non-nuclear threat.
The most likely scenario for an Israeli retaliatory strike would involve the IAF. Israel has already demonstrated its ability to conduct long-range strikes, such as the recent attack on Hodeidah in Yemen. These operations, conducted over 2,000 kilometres from Israeli airbases, showcased the capabilities of the IAF, particularly its ability to strike targets and return without meeting significant opposition. This was partly due to the lack of a robust air defence system in Yemen. Iran, however, presents a more challenging target, with a more sophisticated air defence system and greater distances involved.
Israel has invested in aerial refuelling capabilities, which would extend the range of its aircraft. The F-15, specifically modified for Israeli use, is considered the most powerful in terms of payload and range, making it a likely candidate for strikes on Iranian targets. Israel has also procured additional refuelling aircraft, further extending its operational reach. The F-35, while offering stealth capabilities, has a more limited range, but ongoing developments in fuel tanks are designed to mitigate this.
When considering what types of targets Israel might strike, it is clear that a multi-faceted approach would be necessary. For example, initial strikes would likely focus on neutralising Iran’s air defence systems, particularly the Russian-supplied S-300 system. These systems pose a significant threat to Israeli aircraft and would need to be disabled early in any operation. Israel has already demonstrated its ability to destroy such systems, with reports of a radar being destroyed in Esfahan following a previous Iranian attack.
In terms of the weaponry that Israel could employ, the country has developed a range of precision-guided munitions specifically designed for such operations. The Rampage missile, developed by Israel Aerospace Industries, is a long-range, air-launched missile that can strike targets from hundreds of kilometres away. This missile is considered highly effective for taking out enemy air defence systems or military command centres. Another potential weapon is the Rockx missile, a ballistic missile launched from aircraft, which can strike targets with a high degree of accuracy.
Israel has also invested in bunker-busting munitions, which would be crucial if the targets included Iran’s underground nuclear facilities. However, such an operation would require the involvement of the United States, as only American bombers like the B-2 are capable of carrying the types of munitions needed to destroy deeply buried targets. Given the complexity and scale of such an operation, and the potential for regional instability, a strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure seems less likely in the immediate future unless coordinated with the US.
Despite the overwhelming military capability that Israel possesses, the Iranian air force and air defence systems, though outdated, cannot be entirely dismissed. Iran still operates a range of aircraft, including older Russian MiG-29s and American-made F-14s from the Shah’s era. While these aircraft are considered outdated by modern standards, they remain operational. Iran’s air defence systems, while not as effective as Israel’s, still pose a threat, especially in combination with their ballistic missile capabilities.
In conclusion, Israel’s response to Iran is not a matter of if, but when. The question remains about what targets will be chosen and which systems will be employed in the attack. Whether through air strikes, submarine-launched missiles, or a combination of both, Israel has the means to conduct a highly coordinated and effective retaliation.
Image source: twz.com
Read also:
Iran’s Missile Strike on Israel: Air Defences Prove Effective
