“We will be the first nation to become extinct through tiredness.” This dark humor making the rounds inside Tel Aviv’s bomb shelters captures the ambivalence of Israeli fear and resilience as nightly missile alertations call families from their bedrooms. Five consecutive nights have ripped the pace of life in Israel with sirens and rushed runs to shelters a protest against the psychological strain and the deeply embedded culture of readiness characterizing the Israeli home front.
But underlying the jest is a deeper disquiet, one based on the incessant improvement in Iranian missile capabilities and the strategic question marks surrounding the United States’ next step. The Israeli people’s discussions are filled with two questions: Will the US militarily intervene against Iran, and what if President Trump chooses to refrain?
The technical context to these concerns is formidable. Iran’s ballistic missile force is the largest in the region, consisting of a minimum of 14 missile types, both solid and liquid fueled. The Fateh-110 and its variants, including the Zolfaghar and Khalij Fars, have ranges of up to 750 kilometers and are capable of precision strikes. The Shahab 3 family, based on North Korean technology, has a range of up to 2,000 kilometers, putting all of Israel and US bases in the Middle East in range. Iran’s domestic aerospace establishment continues to introduce new systems, like the Khorramshahr 4, that can carry a 1,500 kilogram payload 2,000 kilometers, and even boasts developing hypersonic missiles although the status of such capability is unknown to be operational.
The psychological effect of these developments is exacerbated by the disparity in protection infrastructure. In Arab towns such as Tamra, the lack of bomb shelters has left citizens vulnerable to attack. As one resident explained to Middle East Eye, “Most homes in Tamra, and those in predominantly Arab towns, lack shelters.” The comparison is stark: nearby Mitzpe Aviv, with a population of just 1,100, has 13 public shelters, while Tamra’s 35,000 citizens have none. When Tamra was hit by Iranian missiles, the consequence was tragedy and a new feeling of exposure—a technical and social deficit with life and death implications.
For US strategic planners, the possibility of direct confrontation with Iran is a logistical and technological challenge of another kind. The Pentagon keeps 40,000 to 50,000 soldiers in the area, all within range of Iranian missiles and drones. The US military’s dependence on commercial shipping to carry 80 percent of its logistics produces devastating vulnerabilities, particularly since Iran’s proxies like the Houthis have shown the capability to target key maritime corridors like the Red Sea and Bab al Mandab. As Lt. Col. James Shepard describes, the Houthi capabilities are impeding the speed that is so crucial to military logistics, alternative routes from Africa totaling fifteen days and an additional $1 million in fuel expense per shipment. The US has also looked to workarounds, such as the Trans Arabian Network a grand network of 300 logistics hubs throughout the Arabian Peninsula and the UAE Israel land bridge, which can accommodate as many as 350 trucks a day. Those workarounds are not yet in operation, however, and the ongoing risk of missile and drone strikes means that no supply line is safe.
Technologically, too, Iran’s developments go beyond missiles. The new commissioning of the IRGC Shahid Bagheri, a 41,000-ton container vessel turned drone carrier, heralds a new era in asymmetric naval power projection. The sloping flight deck of the Shahid Bagheri and its capability for drones, helicopters, and small craft make it no peer to US supercarriers. But, noted Professor Shaul Chorev, “They take a merchant ship, equip it with a flight deck, and turn it into a poor man’s helicopter or drone carrier. It meets all their needs.” The ship’s shortcomings non military grade construction, narrow survivability, and small air group are balanced by its capability to project Iranian power and disrupt opponent planning, particularly in contested littoral environments.
The US itself has spent billions on sophisticated missile defense systems along the Gulf, from Kuwait to the UAE. But the sheer number and variety of Iranian missiles, many of them GPS guided and able to saturate defenses, constitute a formidable challenge. As Douglas Barrie of the International Institute for Strategic Studies put it, Iran’s ballistic missiles pose a major threat to US bases and allies from Turkey, Israel, and Egypt in the west, to Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States to the south, to Afghanistan and Pakistan to the east.
In this context, President Trump is confronted with a crucible that will determine not merely his presidency but the strategic future of the Middle East. Israeli politicians, including retired Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, have been clear: “We believe that the United States of America and the president of the United States have an obligation to make sure that the region is going to a positive way and that the world is free from Iran that possesses (a) nuclear weapon,” Gallant said to CNN. Prime Minister Netanyahu, on the other hand, ruled out the chances of diplomacy, cautioning that “Today, it’s Tel Aviv. Tomorrow, it’s New York. Look, I understand ‘America First.’ I don’t understand ‘America Dead’. That’s what these people want,” he told ABC.
Trump’s politics is risky. His “America First” base is crumbling, with prominent voices such as Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon cautioning that intervention would be a betrayal of the movement’s very principles. This Pearl Harbor-type attack on the mullahs is fine for Israel. But is it right for the United States? Bannon inquired on “War Room.” Meanwhile, neoconservative hawks and Israeli officials contend that only the US has the bunker busting capabilities needed to disable Iran’s deeply buried nuclear sites, like Fordow.
Iran’s own stance is still belligerent. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said the US “cannot do a damn thing” regarding Iran’s missile capability, and the regime has consistently shown itself willing to employ its missiles for both deterrence and propaganda. The spread of missile technology to proxies Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Shia militias in Iraq adds to the complicating factors in the threat environment, creating a matrix of launch points that could overwhelm the most advanced missile defenses. The digital chessboard is now set, each move haunted by the specter of escalatory war. Israeli national resilience, Iranian creativity in asymmetric warfare, and logistical strain on US military action meet in an area where each siren, each test of missiles, and each presidential tweet sounds far beyond the immediate battlefield.
