Iran’s military strikes: a double-edged message of deterrence and reassurance

On Monday evening, tension gripped the region amid initial reports of strikes on Erbil, suggesting a potential targeting of American interests. Against the backdrop of escalating tensions related to the Israel-Hamas war, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed responsibility for a series of strikes, involving ballistic missiles and suicide drones, on the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan. This resulted in damage to residential areas, claiming four lives and injuring others.

Iran asserted that the target was “one of the main Zionist espionage centers in Iraqi Kurdistan,” denying any impact on American interests, as confirmed by Washington sources to various media outlets.

Tehran framed the attack as retaliation for recent Israeli-led assassinations of several high-ranking members of the IRGC and the Axis of Resistance in Syria and Lebanon.

At the same time, Iran carried out strikes in northern Syria, citing a response to a double attack in Kerman, claimed by the Islamic State (ISIS) group in early January. With increasing attacks against its interests, Tehran aimed to send a clear and strong message of deterrence directed at the US and Israel.

Staying out of war

Despite the highly tense regional situation, the strikes do not appear to be aimed at provoking an escalation, which Iran has sought to avoid since the beginning of the Israel-Hamas war on Oct. 7.

The war in the Palestinian enclave wasn’t even mentioned in Iran’s official statements. This absence underscores that Monday’s operations do not mean that Iran wants to enter the fray in Gaza.

“Iran has been employing the concept of deterrence through punishment for years,” said Abdolrasool Divsallar, a researcher at the Middle East Institute and professor at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore.

The US swiftly downplayed the significance of the strikes near the yet-to-be-operational new American consulate in Erbil. Washington denounced these “reckless” attacks, expressing concern about their impact on Iraq’s stability.

Washington is actively working to contain the expanding war in the Palestinian enclave, which has already spilled into the Lebanese and Yemeni fronts, along with frequent attacks on Syrian and Iraqi soil.

“While the theoretical risk of escalation exists, it remains limited as the strikes targeted locations chosen to avoid causing harm to American personnel or exceeding established rules of engagement,” said Divsallar.

In a possible indication of a return to the deterrence approach, the Islamic resistance in Iraq launched three armed drones — which were intercepted — in the direction of Erbil airport on Tuesday morning, near a military base housing soldiers from the international coalition against ISIS, including Americans.

Deterrence message

Iran has notably limited its strikes within allied countries. Meanwhile, the Khorassan branch of ISIS, primarily active in Afghanistan and Pakistan, has been identified as responsible for the attack in Kerman. The attack claimed the lives of around a hundred people on Jan. 3, 2024, during a ceremony honoring IRGC leader Qassim Soleimani, who was killed in a US strike four years ago.

However, the retaliatory strikes were carried out in Syria. According to the Amwaj media outlet, IRGC justified their choice of target by asserting that members of the terrorist group’s branch had received training in Idlib, the rebel stronghold in northwest Syria.

“The last thing Iran wants is a war with the Taliban,” said Hamidreza Azizi, a researcher at the Stiftung für Politik und Wissenschaft. “Consequently, it has opted for ‘easy targets.’”

However, Iran’s venture into Kurdish territory sends a resounding message to Israel and the US, emphasizing that Tehran possesses the capability to strike across the entire region, and is willing to do so. The strikes in northern Syria reveal, for the first time, the reach of its military equipment.

“The type of missiles Iran used sends a clear signal, especially to Israel, showcasing its ability to execute highly precise long-range strikes from distant locations in Iran,” Divsallar said. “This enhances Iran’s deterrent capability.”

Beyond this display of limited force, Iran aims to demonstrate that its threats of retaliation carry weight. While an official response to the elimination of Soleimani is yet to be implemented, Iran targeted American interests in Iraq a few days after his assassination in January 2020, aiming to avoid seeming vulnerable.

Reassuring supporters

The recent message appears to be directed not only to external actors but, perhaps more crucially, to the Axis of Resistance and Iran’s allies. In recent weeks, Western attacks have increased without eliciting a substantial response from the pro-Iranian camp.

Apart from the coalition led by the US targeting Houthi infrastructure in Yemen, there have been American and Israeli strikes in Iraq and Syria, disrupting Tehran’s regional network’s command structure. This underscores the need for a robust response, and signals Iran’s commitment to defending its interests and those of its allies in the face of escalating external actions.

In less than a month, a high-ranking member of the IRGC’s al-Quds force, Razi Moussavi, was assassinated near Damascus. Shortly after, Hamas’s number two man, Saleh al-Arouri, was killed in a surgical strike in Beirut’s southern suburb.

Moreover, two members of the pro-Iranian Popular Mobilization Unit (PMU) were killed in Baghdad, as well as an official of Hezbollah’s al-Radwan force, Wissam Tawil, in southern Lebanon.

“Regional events made an Iranian response necessary, and Tehran also felt that failure to respond would have been more costly,” said Divsallar. “Iran probably thought it would boost morale and provide psychological support to the Axis of Resistance to show that it was not backing down, and that it was not threatened by joint Israeli American operations.”

There was also some criticism at home concerning the state’s inaction to the Kerman attacks.

Despite being an ally, one of Iran’s partners now faces an awkward situation in the aftermath of this strike. While Baghdad vehemently condemned the American strike, which killed two leaders of a pro-Iranian militia in the capital on Jan. 4, insisting on the departure of American troops from the country, the Iraqi authorities found it challenging to ignore a new violation of their sovereignty — this time by Tehran.

This dilemma is exacerbated by the fact that the Iranian strike resulted in the death of Peshraw Dizayee, a multimillionaire closely affiliated with the Barzani clan in power in Erbil, along with several members of his family.

The Iraqi government denoucned the incident as an “aggression.” National Security Adviser Qassem al-Aaraji dismissed the allegations about the presence of a Mossad headquarters, Israel’s foreign intelligence agency, in the Kurdish capital as “false and incorrect.”

In response, the Foreign Ministry expressed the possibility of taking retaliatory measures, including filing a complaint with the United Nations Security Council.

On Tuesday, Baghdad recalled its ambassador to Iran for “consultations” after summoning the Iranian envoy to the country.

However, Mohammad Chia al-Soudani, appointed Prime Minister with the support of pro-Iranian parties in the Shiite Coordination Framework, might find it challenging to take further action.

There’s a political dynamic where a weakened Erbil could potentially benefit him.

It’s worth noting that a similar strike, accusing links with Israel, occurred in March 2022 on a businessman’s villa in Erbil by the IRGC, with minimal repercussions on relations between the two neighbors.

This article was originally published in L'Orient-Le Jour. Translated by Sahar Ghoussoub.