What if Israel Bombed Iran?

Important note: this scenario was written in October 2023, when the conflict between Israel and Hamas had just broken out. It is, of course, necessary to exercise extreme caution when devising a credible scenario, as events may develop at a pace that makes the present exercise useless. This scenario serves more as food for thought about the possible consequences if the Israeli army were to launch an attack on Iran, in an extremely tense regional context.

At the time of writing, anything is possible in the Middle East. Nevertheless, given Israel’s priorities — to punish Hamas — the possibility of a large-scale strike on Iran is relatively remote: Tzahal (the Israeli Defence Forces, or IDF) is fully engaged in and around its territory, and a dispersal of military resources is unlikely. Nevertheless, it may be useful to consider the prospect of a strike on Iran because, on the one hand, the possibility of such raids has repeatedly been mentioned and, on the other, the situation would be changed if it were confirmed that Iran had been involved in organising, planning, and carrying out the deadly Hamas incursions on 7 October. It is therefore relevant, as a tool for reflection, to consider this particular “what-if” scenario.

The general idea behind this raid, focused on political rather than military goals, quickly wins over a large number of Israeli officials, particularly in the left-wing political parties. Its aim is not to weaken the Islamic Republic of Iran’s capacity to cause harm, but to decapitate a regime which, since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, has continually called for the destruction of the “Zionist regime” occupying the territory that it calls Al-Quds (Jerusalem, Islam’s third holiest site).

The targets of the raid are therefore the command centres and barracks of the Revolutionary Guard (Pasdaran) in Iran’s main cities, as well as the barracks of the bassidji (the Islamic militia responsible for maintaining order) and the compounds of detention centres where political prisoners are held, such as the notorious Evin Prison in Tehran. These actions are to be preceded by a powerful cyber-attack on Iranian communications centres, followed by a massive appeal on Iranian radio stations and social networks to encourage the population to take advantage of the strikes to overthrow the regime. The Israeli government approves the operation, which is given the codename “Holofernes” (the name of the Assyrian general beheaded by Judith in the Old Testament).

The raids planned by the Israelis would focus on the main Iranian cities in the western half of the country, favouring those where popular protest following the death of Mahsa Amini was strongest: Tehran, Tabriz (in Iranian Azerbaijan), the main Kurdish cities such as Mahabad and Sanandaj (Mahsa Amini belonged to the Kurdish minority), Isfahan, and Shiraz.

The raids would target sites crucial to the command and control capabilities of the Revolutionary Guard, their barracks located in and around cities, and political prisons. These prisons would be hit by precision missiles with the aim of breaching the perimeter walls and facilitating the escape of prisoners.

These raids would mobilise the majority of the IDF’s fighter bombers: between 70 and 80 F-15 Eagles and Strike Eagles (out of the hundred or so in service), several refuelling aircraft escorted by F-16s, as well as electronic warfare aircraft to jam Iranian radars. Finally, the new F-35s would also be put to work, deploying around twenty aircraft, or half the available fleet.

The Raids: Revolution or Reaction?

From this point in the scenario, two main trajectories are possible. In the first case, the outcome of the raids is a great success for the Israelis, while the second possibility is for a disappointing outcome for the Israelis, with particularly harmful consequences.

– In the first scenario, the Iranian population takes to the streets of the main cities in great numbers. The Islamic regime is completely caught off guard, with attacks on communications centres causing chaos and confusion, greatly reducing the ability of the Islamic Republic’s top leadership to react.

In Tehran, a crowd moves towards the main centres of power and invades Evin Prison. The police are overwhelmed, while the Basij are challenged by a population bursting with anger and frustration. The Pasdaran units, badly hit by the raid, can only muster limited resistance. The authorities call in units of the Artesh, the regular army, which is mainly made up of conscripts. But these units refuse to obey orders to repress the uprising, and gradually join the rebels in the streets of Tehran, who now number in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

This scenario could lead to the establishment of a democratic regime in Iran after a period of confusion, although it is difficult to determine how long such a period could last. However, it is almost certain that Israel’s security situation would be permanently improved, thereby fulfilling the overall objective of the raids against Iran. Indeed, it is likely that a democratic Iran would choose to rapidly normalise its relations with the Jewish state, as was the case under the imperial regime. Without the dominance of Islamist rhetoric calling for the destruction of the Zionist regime, Iran would find few obstacles to a rapprochement with Tel Aviv. Financial support for the Lebanese Hezbollah would cease immediately, which would weaken the hand of this militia party in the politics of Lebanon. The same would apply to Shia militias in Iraq and support for the Yemeni Houthis.^[1]

Relations with the US would also be re-established, with the American Iranian diaspora making a major return to the mother country, which would also help to bring in human and financial capital. However, relations with countries with a Sunni Muslim majority, and Saudi Arabia in particular, would not necessarily improve. A non-Islamic Iranian regime would retain a fundamental dimension of Iranian political culture: nationalism and the preservation of Iran’s regional role. Tehran could therefore adopt a posture of balance between Russia and the US, close to the Indian posture of non-alignment. The new Iranian authorities would prioritise the preservation of national interests, while also displaying an attitude aimed at attracting capital to develop its economy.

The first likely outcome would be Tehran calling on the Lebanese Hezbollah to commit all its available forces to the battle against the Jewish state. Ballistic missiles would probably be fired against American bases in Bahrain, as well as oil terminals in Saudi Arabia, to punish the latter for allowing Israeli planes to fly over its territory. The Strait of Hormuz would immediately be mined, which, combined with the attacks on Saudi terminals, would cause an unprecedented oil shock. Every branch and ally of the Islamic regime in the Arab world would be mobilised: Shiite militias in Iraq, Houthis in Yemen, militias linked to Tehran in Syria, etc. The Leader of the Revolution would proclaim Holy War against Israel and the US, which could cause a general conflagration in the Middle East. Russia could take advantage of the situation to draw a little closer to Arab and Islamic regimes, presenting itself as the defender of the oppressed victims of Western and American imperialism. China could adopt a similar position, while also calling for de-escalation. The consequences would be catastrophic, particularly if Israel’s very existence were to be threatened. If Tel Aviv were backed into a corner, the mentality of the “Masada complex”^[2] could resurface, potentially leading to Israeli nuclear strikes against the main Arab capitals and major Iranian cities.

This article has been translated from French by Sam Ferguson.