New satellite images have shown that an Iranian air base suffered significant damage from an Israeli attack on Friday.
Israel sent a retaliatory missile early Friday morning to hit an Iranian target in the central province of Isfahan, a week after Iran sent a salvo of 300 missiles and drones into Israel.
The salvo attack was in response to a rocket attack on an Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, which killed seven people, including two top-level generals.
Although Iran has claimed no damage has been caused by military bases, a BBC Analysis of Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) satellite images captured over Isfahan on Friday shows that Shikari Air Base suffered significant injuries on Friday.
Debris and damage can be seen around a key component, most likely a radar, which has changed position slightly.
Debris and damage can be seen around a key component, most likely a radar, which has changed position slightly
Your browser does not support iframes.
Several positions on the base that would normally house S-300 rocket launchers have also been removed since the attack and it is currently unclear where they went.
There were fears that Iran’s nuclear sites were damaged in the retaliatory strikes, although the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency has said there was “no damage to Iran’s nuclear sites.”
Iranian officials sought to downplay any significant damage to military facilities and flatly denied that any nuclear power plants had been destroyed, while Iranian state television this morning published images of an undisturbed Isfahan to cast doubt on reports that the city had been hit.
Experts said the strike was intended to be “de-escalatory” and allowed both countries to take a step back from rising tensions while saving face.
Dr. Andreas Krieg, an expert on Middle East security and senior lecturer at King’s College London’s School of Security Studies, told MailOnline that such a limited strike could be seen as an attempt by Tel Aviv to exit a major kinetic conflict. to climb.
“If this is the extent of Israel’s retaliation, it could be described as a de-escalatory attack. “The use of small drones such as quadcopters provides a degree of plausible deniability that could help Iran downplay the effect of the attack,” he said.
“We could say that this attack is a return to the shadow war that has been going on for years, if that is the extent of it.
He added: “The Iranians should respond to an attack that is undeniable or involves Israeli fighter jets over Iran – but this attack does not cross the threshold. Neither side wants an all-out war.”
“I think a protracted but manageable conflict is in Netanyahu’s interest. This can be achieved by expanding the conflict with the Iranian Resistance Axis. This is a low-risk conflict that keeps Israel on high alert without the risk of becoming existential.
“Israel could, over time, decide to engage in a series of scattered attacks that are individually so negligible that Iran does not have to respond. “Israel could resort to Iran’s ‘death by a thousand cuts’ strategy, which is difficult to discourage.”
Similar sentiments were expressed by Justin Crump, British Army veteran and CEO of global risk analytics company Sibylline.
“It remains to be seen whether this is the start of a more coordinated campaign by Israel to steadily damage Iran while remaining below an escalation threshold, or an isolated act,” he told MailOnline in the aftermath of the overnight strikes.
“Iran has its own internal problems with rising inflation and anti-regime sentiment and has so far been keen to prevent things from escalating. While there are, and likely will be, similar subthreshold responses, this limits larger escalations.
“But,” he continued, “this cannot really be a return to normal and I would say that the honor on both sides is far from satisfied at the moment.”
While he said the Israeli attacks “may give the illusion that we have nipped the crisis in the bud, […] the basic alert level across the region is now being escalated for an extended period.”
He added: “The risk of miscalculation is greater and many points of tension remain, especially in Gaza, but also around Iran’s nuclear ambitions and capabilities. If this really comes from Israel […] then there will be a period for intensive diplomacy, but how long it will remain stable and open remains to be seen.’