Will a ceasefire deal in Gaza be a ‘strategic opportunity’ for Iran?

Many Iranians have experienced restless nights since the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, as tensions between Iran and Israel continue to simmer.

This is not the first time that the lives of Iranians have been overshadowed by conflict with Israel or with the United States. But today the fears are much more intense as Israel has signalled its readiness to extend the conflict into Iranian territory, heightening anxieties across the nation.

“I don’t know what will happen next, but this time the threat of war feels so close,” said a 67-year-old retiree living in Tehran, who wished to remain anonymous when speaking to The New Arab.

“I’m not a political analyst, but just following the news makes me fear another war like the one we had with Iraq,” he added, referring to the Iran-Iraq war that began in 1980 and lasted for eight years.

For many ordinary Iranians, memories of that war resurface whenever a military confrontation, whether direct or indirect, looms between Iran and its adversaries. In April, when Iran launched a retaliatory barrage of drones and missiles targeting Israel, many Iranians drew comparisons to that conflict in interviews with TNA.

Although the initial fears of a new war have somewhat diminished, two pressing questions linger for millions of Iranians: What will happen next, and why has Iran not retaliated yet?

No choice other than retaliation

Given Haniyeh’s significance among Tehran’s allies and the circumstances of his assassination, almost all political experts and foreign affairs analysts agree that Iran has little choice but to retaliate.

An Iranian foreign policy expert, speaking with TNA from Tehran, suggested that the delay in Iran’s response may be due to disagreements among the country’s high-ranking political and military decision-makers.

“The previous attacks have proven insufficient, as they no longer provide a deterrent effect. Something much bigger must be done, but is Iran ready for that?” the expert questioned.

According to this expert, there is a division among decision-makers in the higher levels of government, particularly within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). He cautioned that any miscalculation in retaliation could plunge Iran into a destructive war with Israel.

“Despite its aggressive rhetoric, Iran has consistently shown that it does not seek to be at the forefront of a war with Israel. Prior to the attack in April, all of Iran’s retaliatory strikes following the killing of high-ranking IRGC commanders by Israeli forces in Syria were directed at sites in Kurdish Iraq,” he added.

However, Mohsen Sazgara, a former high-ranking IRGC commander who left the country in 2033, holds a different view. He believes that the IRGC has prepared various operations aimed directly at Israel.

“The IRGC and the official army have devised plans to attack Israel and have presented them to [the Supreme Leader] Khamenei. Reports suggest that Sejil, Fattah, and Khorramshahr missiles could be used in this attack, potentially escalating the conflict to a new level,” Sazgara said.

“It is anticipated that the Islamic Republic plans to target two types of locations in Israel: military sites and Jewish settlements,” he added.

A ceasefire deal could save Iran

Amid ongoing regional tensions, another Iranian analyst has highlighted Iran’s strategic approach to avoiding direct conflict with Israel. The analyst noted a significant shift in Iran’s policy since the 1979 revolution, emphasising the country’s current focus on its doctrine of “Expanding Strategic Depth” rather than spreading its revolutionary ideals.

“Today’s Islamic Republic is not the same as it was in 1979,” the analyst told TNA. “The current government has adopted a strategy to keep conflicts away from its borders by using proxy forces to engage in confrontations with the US and Israel.”

The analyst emphasised that the Iranian leadership, with 45 years of experience, is now focused on preserving its power and the economic benefits from its oil and gas resources.

The analyst referred to the tit-for-tat attacks in April between Tehran and Tel Aviv as evidence of Iran’s restraint.

On 13 April, Iran launched a drone and missile attack on Israeli territory in response to Tel Aviv’s missile attack on Tehran’s consulate in Damascus. The analyst described the action as a “measured and controlled retaliation,” noting that Iran had provided advance warning to its neighbours and Washington, characterising the strikes as “limited” and defensive.

Additionally, the analyst pointed out Iran’s restrained response to Israel‘s retaliatory attack on an S-300 air defence system in Iran, suggesting that the regime chose to downplay the incident rather than escalate the situation.

Looking ahead, the analyst suggested that a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas would be beneficial for Iran. “A ceasefire would allow Iran to claim that, out of respect for Palestinian rights, it is avoiding actions that could jeopardise the truce,” he concluded.