In the absence of strategy, spectacular choreography. The image of missiles tearing through the night skies over Jerusalem makes for a powerful photograph. However, symbols cannot be a substitute for strategy. Last Saturday's attack was a propaganda exercise. Spectacular, yes; but senior members of the Iranian Armed Forces continue to be eliminated, while Israel's military and economic assets remain intact.

There is a term, 'zugzwang', which is used in chess when one of the players must respond to the opponent's piece move and finds himself in a position where he would prefer not to. Any maneuver on the board means worsening his status. And yet he must do so. This was the status of the Islamic Republic after the recent bombing of its consulate in Damascus by Israel, a bombing with which the Hebrew state decapitated the structure of the Revolutionary Guard manager of Iranian military planning in Syria and the Levant. The dilemma over how to respond to the attack delayed Tehran's retaliation for more than ten days. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei knew that Israel's action could not go unanswered. To do nothing would show weakness and encourage more aggressive attacks by Israel and other enemies of the Islamic Republic in the region. However, an insufficiently calibrated response could open the door to an Israeli counterattack and the start of an escalation beyond Tehran's control. The ayatollahs' regime is not interested in an open war with Israel, especially at a time when the United States has deployed its troops in the region.

In 2013, Israel, faced with the deployment of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in the Syrian civil war, began a discreet bombing campaign. This campaign intensified in 2018 and has subsequently taken a qualitative leap following the massacre perpetrated by Hamas last October 7. Since its inception, Iran has failed to respond to this dynamic of bombardments 'in crescendo'. After years of passivity, Tehran has lost the initiative. In the absence of a strategy to regain deterrence, the Islamic Republic has shielded itself behind a vague propaganda exercise in which it stresses its "strategic patience" in the face of Israeli provocations. Through this campaign Israel has achieved a decisive victory: unmasking Iran as a rational actor.

One of the pillars of the Islamic Republic's deterrence strategy since its inception has been to convey the idea that they are a fundamentalist regime, ready for martyrdom. Tehran as an unpredictable actor that, if it feels threatened, is ready to go to the ultimate consequences and bring Armageddon to the Middle East. This is a religious version of the 'madman theory' applied by Nixon during the Vietnam War. However, after years of Israeli bombardment, Iran has shown itself to be a far from volatile actor. On the contrary, a very predictable and cautious actor when it feels truly intimidated. This has encouraged Israel to increase and extend its attacks against an increasingly defensive Iran. But the destruction of the consulate in Damascus has been the last straw. The assassination of General Mohammad Reza Zahedi in the Damascus consulate was a quantum leap and the hardest blow Iran has received after the 2020 assassinations of the architect of Iranian regional hegemony, Qasem Soleimani, and the mastermind of the nuclear program, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. Iran had to do something to regain the initiative.

Most of its 170 drones, 120 ballistic missiles and 30 missiles from Wayside Cross were intercepted before they even reached Israeli airspace. A few missiles reportedly managed to hit the Nevatim air base, which hosts the air force's F-35 fighters. However, the damage was minimal. The complex air defense mesh thus proved virtually impenetrable. It is true that Israel was only able to achieve this thanks to cooperation with the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom, the United States and several Arab countries. However, this fact does not represent a dent for Israel (as many in Iran have wanted to point out), but rather sample the strength of the alliances of the Hebrew State with countries core topic in the region and in the world, while Iran's solitude is noted. Faced with this reality, Tehran has sought to console itself by drawing attention to the fact that its attack involved an outlay of less than one hundred million dollars compared to more than one billion for Israel. The fact that Tehran is talking about the money spent by both sides gives an idea of the success of the operation.

All this produces a sense of 'déjà vu'. It is worth recalling what happened after the removal of Soleimani in Baghdad, ordered by Trump. After days of deafening war drumbeat and hyperbolic rhetoric, bordering on hysteria, as has been the norm for decades, Iran merely offered a token response. Iran reportedly disclosed to the White House the time and place of the attack. It is paradoxical: the action with which Iran sought to re-establish an image of strength was undermined by the fear of causing real damage to U.S. troops. This is not the best way to reestablish deterrence. Rather, it constituted a face-saving exercise in symbolic response. A carefully choreographed exercise that Iran repeated last weekend in its attack on Israel. Tehran's panic of uncontrolled escalation led to certain embarrassing gestures, such as announcing that it was satisfied before even knowing the results of its own attack. That is, Iran did not care if a single missile touched Israeli soil; all it wanted was a gesture to feign revenge for the Zahedi assassination and to put the matter behind it sooner rather than later: hardly a credible strategy to turn the equation of its conflict with Israel around.

In the absence of strategy, a spectacular choreography. Certainly, the image of missiles tearing through the night skies over Jerusalem and the gleam of intercepts over the Dome of the Rock (the fetish site of Iranian war propaganda) make for powerful photography. However, symbols cannot be a substitute for strategy, nor can they compensate for the lack of results on the ground. Last Saturday's attack was a propaganda exercise. Spectacular, yes; but senior members of the Iranian Armed Forces continue to be eliminated, while Israel's military and economic assets remain intact. The whistling of missiles and the drone buzz cannot hide the fact that, as of today, Iran is still no closer to turning the tables in its covert war with Israel.

After the Islamic Republic's move the question now is the Israeli rejoinder. Netanyahu has an opportunity (which will close as the days go by) to respond to the attack by causing real damage to the Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure. If this does not happen, it will be because of pressure from the White House. Indeed, the generous protection offered to Israel by Washington last weekend has to be understood in this light. If Biden prevented Iranian missiles and drones from causing significant damage in Israel, he would succeed in disarming Netanyahu's motives for a counterattack on Iran. From the U.S. point of view, an unscathed Israel after the attack is an Israel with fewer arguments when it comes to pursuing its offensive against Tehran. The question now is whether Netanyahu will give in to Biden or respond to Iran's 'response'.