A deafening silence. Four days after the Iranian attack on his country, Benjamin Netanyahu has still not spoken. From Tel Aviv to Eilat, many Israelis, however, would like to hear from their leader. Because everyone here realizes how historic the moment is. For the first time since the Gulf War (1991), Israel suffered an attack on its soil. The future of the country has never been so uncertain since the Yom Kippur War, half a century ago. But the Israeli Prime Minister does not speak. Worse, the Walla information site revealed that “Bibi” had spent this crazy night of April 13 to 14 in the luxurious villa of billionaire Simon Falic, equipped with an ultra-sophisticated anti-missile shelter.
The idea that Benjamin Netanyahu slept this Shabbat near a bunker, cut off from the world, while the Hebrew sky was studded with explosions and the country plunged into anguish, will undoubtedly be blamed on him one day – like many other errors. But today, in Jerusalem, the situation is too serious to call him to account.
By firing more than 300 drones and missiles for five hours (certainly without causing damage, thanks to the regional defensive alliance led by Washington and the effectiveness of the Israeli anti-missile system), Iran nonetheless broke a taboo: that of daring to directly strike the Jewish State on its territory. “This is an unprecedented event in the history of the Middle East, confirms the former head of Israeli military intelligence, Amos Yadlin, and also a change in the operating mode of Tehran which has always preferred to pass by its regional proxies, the Lebanese Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen or Hamas in Gaza.”
Double Iranian failure
Meant as an Iranian response to an airstrike attributed to Israel on April 1 against a consular building in Damascus that killed seven members of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, including a senior senior, the reprisal operation ended in failure. On the conventional level, first, since 99% of missiles and drones have been stopped. “We intercepted. We blocked. Together we will win,” the Israeli Prime Minister posted on X on Sunday April 14 in his only public reaction.
But also on a strategic level: overnight, the Iranian attack allowed Jerusalem to break the diplomatic isolation in which the country found itself, after six months of war against Hamas. “This is a rare opportunity not to be missed,” says Amos Yadlin, while welcoming the mobilization of the United States and moderate Arab countries alongside the IDF during the attack. “Israel must now restore its deterrence, but also maintain the regional cooperation that was revealed during this attack,” he continues. “At a time like this, we must not act with our guts.”
Netanyahu, to whom this message is addressed, faces a dilemma. On the one hand, the Prime Minister is under pressure from the American ally who, a few months before the presidential election, wants to avoid at all costs a bidding war with Iran, likely to cause a regional conflagration. On the other hand, he must deal with the hard wing of his coalition, some of whose ultranationalist ministers (some of them excluded from the restricted war cabinet) are advocating a very strong response.
Consensus on the response
Champion of political survival, the leader of Likud, who broke the record for longevity in power held by David Ben-Gurion, will he take advantage of the windfall to restore his security image, damaged after the October 7 massacre perpetrated by Hamas? “Faced with the much more aggressive posture adopted by the Iranians, Israel will not be able to sit idly by,” said David Khalfa, co-director of the North Africa and Middle East Observatory at the Jean Foundation. -Jaurès, there is a consensus on the need for a response, as shown by an opinion survey carried out the day after the attack: 29% of respondents are in favor of immediate reprisals and 37% on a date. later.
The irony of the situation lies in the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu, at the head of the country almost interruptedly for fifteen years, has made the prevention of the Iranian nuclear threat and the weakening of the Shiite axis the cornerstone of its security strategy. “However, he will not take unnecessary risks,” continues David Khalfa. “We should rather expect a calibrated response. But the question of modalities will be crucial.” For now, the options being considered range from a cyberattack to a large-scale military strike against Iran’s nuclear program.
Weakened domestically, in free fall in the polls, accused, during a prime time broadcast by members of his team of negotiators of blocking any progress on the hostage file in Gaza, the Prime Minister could be tempted to play it all. As world leaders call on Israel to exercise restraint, Netanyahu is, indeed, the one with the most to lose.
On the one hand, this leader can use the opportunity to distract from the difficulties of his campaign in Gaza. He could relish the accolade from Washington, which is about to grant him additional budgetary aid. He could also take the opportunity to align himself with the coalition made up of the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Jordan which helped him repel the air attack. In this case, he will have to follow the recommendations of these allies who advocate restraint.
The trap of deterrence
On the other hand, Netanyahu may fear that “the price to pay for joining this alliance against Tehran is the end of his own coalition which includes ultranationalists in favor of a muscular response”, observes Anshel Pfeffer, the daily’s analyst Haaretz. In any case, “Bibi” no longer has room for error. “We have paid the price for the collapse of its security doctrine against Hamas,” criticizes documentary filmmaker Avi Issacharoff, co-author of the successful TV series Fauda. And we now find ourselves trapped on the question of the nature of the deterrence to be carried out against Iran, which Netanyahu had championed. This configuration could degenerate into all-out war with Hezbollah, whose arsenal of weapons is much more deadly than that of Iran.”
Other considerations could change its position. “The war in the north and the south continues and tens of thousands of residents have already had to leave their homes, points out the former Israeli diplomat and ambassador, Freddy Eytan. Currently, civil society is torn apart, the population is tired and does not seem able to endure another long war of attrition.”
.