Iran calls missile attack on Israel ‘legal, rational and legitimate’ | Iran

Iran said its supreme leader made the decision to fire dozens of rockets at Israel in retaliation for Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and recent killings of leaders of Hezbollah and Hamas, two of the main groups in Iran’s so-called Axis of Resistance.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said the decision was made by Ali Khamenei with the support of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and Iran’s Defense Ministry.

Iran’s mission to the United Nations said the actions were a “legal, rational and legitimate response to the Zionist regime’s terrorist attacks that targeted Iranian nationals and interests and violated Iran’s national sovereignty.”

It added that should Israel “dare to respond or commit further malicious acts, a subsequent and devastating response will follow… Regional states and Zionist supporters are advised to separate from the regime.”

Iranian officials added that more waves of ballistic missiles were ready to be launched and said the start of the attacks had been signaled to Western forces in advance.

It was not clear whether Middle Eastern states such as Jordan or Saudi Arabia played any role in protecting Israel’s defenses, as they allegedly did when Iran attacked Israel in April in response to the killing of Iranian officials at a consulate in Damascus attack.

The IRGC said the attack on Israel was in response to the deaths of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on Friday and Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in July.

Iran’s risky decision to fire ballistic missiles against Israel reflects a growing consensus within Iran’s elite that its decision not to launch a military retaliation after Haniyeh’s assassination in Tehran in July was a strategic mistake.

Hardliners say the restraint has given Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the green light to carry out more assassinations against “resistance leaders.”

They compared this to the decisive response of the previous government led by the late then-President Ebrahim Raisi in April after the attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus.

The current president, Masoud Pezeshkian, said he did not react to Haniyeh’s death because he had been assured that Israel was close to signing a ceasefire agreement within a week or two.

Such a deal never materialized, and Pezeshkian felt betrayed.

Iranian officials were also alarmed by Netanyahu’s assertion at the UN last week that one of his war aims was to force a change in the balance of power in the Middle East.

Under such circumstances, Iran felt it simply could not abandon Hezbollah and look weak throughout the region. Either way, they believed, Netanyahu was determined to climb the escalation ladder, so it was necessary to confront him. Some Gulf states had even claimed that Iran would abandon Hezbollah.

The significant hardening of tone was first signaled by SNSC Chairman Ali Akbar Ahmadian, who declared early Tuesday that Iran was at war and claimed Hezbollah had not been sidelined by Israel’s recent string of military and intelligence successes.

Instead, Ahmadian argued: “The enemy is in a state of desperation and is trying to prove himself successful with psychological operations, with one or two operations based mainly on terror, but for him there is no such success.”

He said Hezbollah’s work was not disrupted and no damage was caused to Hezbollah and its fighting capacity. “After this, a new era will begin for Hezbollah,” he added.

However, this optimistic assessment was not universally shared.

In a sign of how the rhetoric is intensifying, Hamid Rasaei – an ally of Saeed Jalili, the hardliner defeated by reformist Pezeshkian in July’s Iranian presidential election – asked: “Why has the Islamic Republic of Iran become passive?” in the face of Threats and aggression from the Zionist regime after the martyrdom of Ismail Haniyeh, the prominent Hamas figure in Iran? Why is the demand for this martyr’s blood delayed? Didn’t this passivity lead to the fake regime (Israel) attacking more? Isn’t Hassan Nasrallah’s martyrdom, the symbol of religious fervor, the result of this inaction? Won’t these delays lead to the fake regime becoming more courageous in martyring other resistance leaders?”

He attacked those who “constantly repeat that no matter what happens, we will not fall into the trap of war with Israel.”

Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for the Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, also stressed that war is not a fear for Iran. He said: “Some say that according to the statements of the Zionist authorities, if we respond to the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, we will trigger a war. I must say that we are not afraid of war. We are not warmongers, but we are ready for any war. On the other hand, we are used to the chants of the Zionist regime and are neither afraid nor afraid of them.”

Alireza Panahian, one of the spokesmen for Khamenei’s office, said: “If the delay in revenge is due to a more comprehensive destruction and a more terrible blow to the Zionist regime, we will accept that, otherwise we will not accept it.”

In parliament, some conservatives had also called on Iran to lift the fatwa on building a nuclear bomb, but Iranian officials played down that rhetoric.

The likelihood of Iran making such a dramatic strategic shift amid current tensions is slim, especially as it gives Netanyahu an excuse to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Khamenei is scheduled to lead Friday prayers this week. It is the first time he has done so since the assassination of Qassem Suleimani, leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Al-Quds Brigade.

It was also confirmed that Pezeshkian is due in Doha, Qatar on Wednesday. While his critics claim that he is overwhelmed, naive or left out, he leads a regime that has been under the greatest external pressure in many decades.

The government spokesman called for an end to the sniper attacks on Tuesday. She said: “We should not forget that our greatest enemy is division within the nation, and when national unity and unity are replaced by division, the smallest threats will pose the greatest danger to us.”