Less than two days after the United States attacks nuclear facilities in Iran, in an unprecedented action since the Islamic Republic establishment, Revolutionary Guard has launched missiles against the Qatar Al-Euded Base used by US Middle East forces. The action, which raised criticism from Arab nations, did not cause damage, and seemed to follow the same script of a similar retaliation by Iran in 2020. However, the regional scenario today is quite distinct, and US leader Donald Trump seems less restrained than at that time.
According to the Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, the country has launched the same number of US missiles against nuclear facilities of Fordow, Natanz and Isfahã at dawn on Sunday night (Saturday night in Brazil). The night of Doha, the Catarian capital, was illuminated by the projects of the projectiles, and the noise of post-interception explosions scared many residents.
“We heard huge crashes, the building trembled, the windows trembled, and when I looked out, the night sky had all those flying lights,” said Mehran Kamrava, a professor at Georgetown University at Catar to Al-Jazeera. – There was a lot of fear among the residents here.
Organize your financial life with AI
No damage was recorded in civil areas or military facilities, including al-eudid. According to military authorities, anonymous, the Iranians used short and medium range missiles, which were intercepted by local anti -airing batteries. Weapons less powerful than those used in the attacks against Israel since June 13, or much less destructive than the bombs thrown by Americans against their territory.
Since US attacks over the weekend, the Islamic Republic has seen the need for a clear response to the US, but to avoid the expansion of a conflict that has already imposed high costs to the country, which may threaten the continuity of the regime. At least so far, the exit seems to have come from a (almost) recent confrontation.
On January 3, 2020, the US, commanded by Trump, in their first term, murdered the head of the Revolutionary Guard’s QDS, General q Soleimani in Baghdad using a drone. Faced with the death of one of the most popular figures in the country, the regime was forced to act, but with the same dilemma today: dose the strength to avoid undesirable climbing.
Continues after advertising
Days later, Iranian missiles fell on a base used by Americans in Iraq, injuring about 100 military personnel and causing some damage. At the time, Tehran said he warned the Iraqi authorities about the imminence of the attack. Revolutionary Guard Aerospace Head of Aerospace, Ali Hajizadeh (killed by Israel on June 13), said the operation was planned not to leave victims, and also to show the US that if they decided, projectiles could cause “up to 500 deaths.”
A script similar to this Monday. A reduced number of missiles (13) was used, as in 2020, local authorities – Qatar – were alerted in advance, the New York Times said, quoting members of the Iranian government. At the same time as they do not directly reach Americans, the regime may claim that it gave a response to the US.
“The message of this decisive action of the children of our nation in the Armed Forces to the White House and its allies is clear and direct: the Islamic Republic of Iran, trusting in God Almighty and supported by the faithful and proud of Islamic Iran, will not leave any aggression to its territorial integrity, sovereignty or national security without response,” said the revolutionary guard in a statement.
Continues after advertising
But there are other elements that preceded Sunday’s attack and the retaliation on Monday. Last week, when Trump had not yet (publicly) decided on bombing, Americans restricted access to Al-Eudid “by excess precaution”, and satellite images showed that many aircraft had left the base just over 500 km from Iran. For analysts, actions that suggest some degree of previous, even indirect coordination.
This does not mean that the decision does not have its risks. Gulf monarchies, including Saudi Arabia, with whom Tehran has relations marked by distrust, called the incident “blatant violation of international law and good neighborhood principles”, and made it clear that they do not want to see each other in the midst of a war that, so far, is not theirs.
And there is the Trump factor. Five years ago, the US president “accepted” the Iranian attack and chose not to enter a war. In his first statements after the missiles launched against Al-Seid, he called the reaction “very weak”, and thanked the Iranians “for warning us in advance, which allowed no life to be lost and no one was injured.”
Continues after advertising
“Perhaps Iran can now proceed to peace and harmony in the region, and I will encourage Israel enthusiastically to do the same. Thanks for your attention to this!”, Trump concluded in a publication on the Truth Social network.
However, as has shown in the early months of his new term, Trump 2.0 is unpredictable and more affected to take risks. Bombing to Iranian nuclear facilities, for example, came when the White House showed the intention to talk to Tehran. A change of position on new attacks on Iran would only be a publication on the social Truth away.
