Iranian missile threats and the growing risks of regional escalation appear to have been a decisive factor in pushing the administration of US President Donald Trump to favour negotiations over military action, amid Washington’s assessment that Tehran’s missile arsenal constitutes a core deterrent capable of striking “Israel” and US forces.
Journalist Eli Leon reported in an article published by Maariv that Iranian threats to launch large scale missile attacks across the Middle East were a key factor driving the Trump administration towards talks rather than a military option, due to fears of far reaching regional repercussions.
Leon cited a report by the Wall Street Journal, which stated that Tehran had warned it would unleash barrages of missiles against a wide range of targets if the United States were to attack Iran. This, according to the report, increased pressure on the White House and forced the US administration to prepare for the possibility that “Israel”, American forces, and allied Arab states in the Gulf could face direct attacks.
According to the newspaper, Iran still possesses around 2,000 medium range ballistic missiles capable of reaching any point in the region, in addition to large stockpiles of short range missiles and anti ship cruise missiles.
The report claimed that these threats came in the aftermath of a military confrontation that took place in June, during which Iran launched approximately 500 missiles at civilian and military targets in “Israel”. Although the attack did not cause significant strategic damage, and “Israel” responded with a 12 day campaign that included strikes on launch platforms and missile storage sites, the Iranian regime emerged from the confrontation retaining most of its missile arsenal.
It added that Iran gained improved experience during the fighting in penetrating Israeli and American defence systems as the battles progressed.
According to Eli Leon, US military officials treat the Iranian threat with great seriousness. President Trump reportedly cancelled plans at the last moment for an attack on Iran that had been scheduled for mid January, after concluding that the United States did not have sufficient forces in the region to carry out a decisive strike, particularly given the need to manage an Iranian response and control escalation.
In this context, the Pentagon is working to deploy additional missile defence systems to the Middle East and the Arabian Gulf. Leon quoted Trump as saying on Friday: “If they do not reach an agreement, the consequences will be extremely severe.”
The report noted that talks began in the Sultanate of Oman on Friday in an attempt to avoid the outbreak of a military conflict. The United States demanded that Iran curb its missile programme as part of any potential agreement, alongside issues related to uranium enrichment and support for regional militias. Iranian officials, however, refused to discuss any restrictions on weapons stockpiles.
In this context, Leon cited Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who said that ballistic missiles have become the backbone of Iranian deterrence in the absence of a large air force.
The report pointed out that Iran’s missile programme was built over decades under the leadership of Amir Ali Hajizadeh, who was killed in an Israeli air strike on 13 June at the start of the latest confrontation.
Hajizadeh was responsible for developing precision missiles with a range of up to around 1,600 kilometres, as well as establishing what are known as underground “missile cities”.
Eli Leon concluded his report by noting that Iran is currently relying on ambiguity and uncertainty surrounding its missile capabilities to deter any new military confrontation. He stressed that officials in Tehran view this programme as a central reason that pushed the United States to choose dialogue over military attack.
