Iran has no good options after two deadly strikes on senior allies

One of the few things working in Iran’s favor after the humiliating news that Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in the Iranian capital overnight is that the regime controls most of the information the world gets to see.

What Iran has said so far is that Haniyeh died after being hit by an “airborne guided projectile” in Tehran where he was attending the inauguration of the Iranian president. But we know little else. Israel has not claimed responsibility for the strike but has previously vowed to eliminate Hamas and its leaders following the October 7 attacks.

Haniyeh’s death came hours after Israel confirmed it carried out a strike in Beirut, Lebanon, on Tuesday that killed the most senior military commander of Hezbollah, another Iranian-backed militant group, who it blamed for a deadly attack in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

The precise details of what happened at around 2 a.m. (5.30 p.m. ET) in Tehran, will dictate what comes next, as Iran looks to present a narrative that justifies and fashions its response.

Whatever the truth and whatever Iran proffers, the attack is clearly a grave violation of its sovereignty and the supposed security bubble of the Iranian capital. Haniyeh was the regime’s guest, and its role as a regional power is compromised if it’s unable to guarantee the simple safety of visiting allies.

There are reports he was staying in a guest house for veterans, and it is unclear whose technical responsibility it was to protect this facility – and whether the elite Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) will be explicitly embarrassed, outside of the wider humiliation of an apparent Israeli assassination deep inside of Iran.

But Iran has stomached comparable violations in the past. The death of its leading nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was met with limited wrath in 2020. The killing of Quds commander Qasem Suleinami, the country’s most fabled military figure, months earlier, led to fiery rhetoric, but instead a limited hit on a remote US base. Iran has stepped back before – and may do so again.

There is no shortage of furious rherotic the day after the strikes, but there is no easy route for Iran. It is clear Tehran has been reluctant, for the months since October 7, to launch its most ferocious proxy, Hezbollah, into a full-scale war with Israel from Lebanon. Putting aside the huge humanitarian horror such a conflict would muster for Lebanese and Israelis alike, Hezbollah remains a powerful card that Tehran gets to play probably once. The regime retains apparent ambitions in its nuclear program and a military eroded by sanctions, so Hezbollah is an ace that must be tabled with astute timing.

Iran has also tried an unprecedented direct all-out attack on Israel before, in April, after senior IRGC commanders were killed in an Israeli strike on Damascus. In short, the 300 drone and missiles fired – straight from Iran at Israel – just didn’t get through. Around 99% of them were intercepted.

The regime’s response to Haniyeh’s death will define its role as a regional power, and, if it fails to appear potent enough, risks that slipping. A stealthy, asymmetric strike, weeks from now, may not fix the damage done to its prestige.

The risk of the unchartered territory we are in is that the gravity of expected responses is not defined – the tit for tat is occurring in an environment evolving by the day. Indeed, the characters making the decisions are changing rapidly, or under intense domestic pressure themselves. This simply accentuates the risk of miscalculation, or of actions taken to satisfy selfish, insular concerns, rather than a wider regional impact. In short, it is a mess that grows, and with it surges the chance of the unexpected.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s first statement on the matter said of Israel, “You killed our dear guest in our house and now have paved the way for your harsh punishment.” But remember this is a superannuated, octogenarian leader who has just endured years of popular unrest and rising conflict with Israel, and 24 hours ago saw a surprisingly moderate president, Masoud Pezeshkian, get sworn in. He is projecting strength internally as much as he is internationally.

Separately, Hezbollah had stumbled it seemed into an acute crisis though the militant group’s apparently mistaken targeting of Druze schoolchildren in the Golan Heights at the weekend. It may feel the strike on Haniyeh has removed the spotlight to respond, for the shortest while, although it may be dragged into Iran’s eventual response. But the fact the assassination of its commander, Fuad Shukr, now seems like a distant memory, exposing how rapidly events are unfolding.

Tehran is taking its time to reveal how, yet again, its innermost sanctum was violated by Israel. The IRGC trailed a statement about Haniyeh at 2.50 a.m. US time, but it eventually avoided most details of how he was killed. Perhaps it doesn’t know, or doesn’t want to say, or is working out what to say in order to find a response that fits – and that it can execute.

Still, red lines have been criss-crossed for months, and this morning we lept a few rungs higher up the ladder of escalation. The agonizing question of the next 24 hours – as Iran fashions its narrative of how this major humiliation came to be – is what remaining steps are there on this well-trodden ladder, and what is at its peak?