The Middle East is witnessing increasing tension with the recent Israeli air attack on Iran, which has put the Iranian leadership before two fateful choices: either a military response or waiting, which will determine whether the region will slide into a comprehensive war or remain at the current level of destructive and destabilizing violence.

According to Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa programme at Chatham House, Iran may avoid military escalation because of the military and economic restrictions imposed on it, as well as the uncertainty surrounding the upcoming US elections and their impact on US policy. Vakil said that the Iranian leadership may be “confined” by these restrictions, especially since such a response could expose its weaknesses. The Iranian military stressed in a statement the importance of the ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon, which some saw as a sign that Tehran intends not to escalate for the time being.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was reserved in his first statement after the attack, stressing the need for balance and not rushing into taking any action. The Israeli attacks last Saturday targeted Iranian air defense batteries and missile production facilities, according to the Israeli military.

Satellite images, according to the Associated Press, indicate that the strikes caused damage to the Parchin military base southeast of Tehran, known for its links to Iran's former nuclear program, and to another base related to the ballistic missile program. Advertisement Despite this, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Mariano Grossi, confirmed via the "X" platform that Iran's nuclear sites are still intact.

Yoel Guzansky, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, said Israel's choice of targets partly reflects its capabilities, as it is unlikely to be able to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities on its own without U.S. help. Avoiding escalation Thomas Juneau, a professor of Iranian affairs at the University of Ottawa, suggested that Iran might avoid escalation and that its response would be limited.

He explained that the Iranian media initially downplayed the attacks, indicating that Tehran did not want to rush into further escalation. According to Junod, Iran faces a difficult dilemma: either respond, which could increase its losses, or not respond, which would make it appear weak in front of its people and allies.

“Any Iranian attempt to respond will have to deal with the fact that Hezbollah, its most important ally against Israel, has been significantly weakened and its conventional weapons systems have been largely repelled twice,” predicted Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group.

Both sides carefully measured the steps of escalation, Fayez added, but they are now in a completely new area, where newly drawn borders have become blurred and previous red lines have largely faded. Vakil agrees that Iran’s response will be limited, and that the Israeli strikes were designed to minimize the chances of escalation. “Israel has once again shown that its precision and military capabilities are superior to Iran’s.” Since last September, Israel has embarked on a qualitative escalation against Hezbollah elements and infrastructure, starting with pager and radio bombings, to the assassination of some of Hezbollah’s first-line leaders, then the assassination of Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah himself, through the targeting of the southern suburbs with shelling and destruction, and finally the ongoing ground invasion attempts.