Iran’s ballistic missile attack on Israel saw some 180 high-speed projectiles rain down across the Jewish state on Tuesday evening.
Israel’s exceptional air defence systems – with help from US Naval forces – seemingly managed to intercept the majority of the rockets and although several locations were impacted, no Israeli casualties were reported.
But the aerial assault, unprecedented in scope and scale, marked a significant escalation in Israel’s ongoing conflict with Iran’s so-called ‘Axis of Resistance’.
With missiles now crossing continents, US defence expert and former destroyer captain Gene Moran said ‘this is no longer a mere skirmish or war of words – Israel and Iran are in a direct conflict, each engaging assets of the other.’
Now, international observers are holding their breath in anticipation of the Israeli response, the scale of which could determine whether the Middle East is plunged into all-out war.
It appears to be a question of when, not if, Israel decides to respond, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other top officials vowing to exact revenge.
With the help of several military experts and regional analysts, MailOnline examines some of the targets Tel Aviv may seek to destroy and assesses the potentially devastating consequences that could arise in each case.
People take pictures of and stand upon the remains of an Iranian missile in Israel after Tuesday’s attack
After Iran’s unprecedented missile strike against Israel on Tuesday night in this rapidly unfolding conflict, it is no surprise that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is already planning revenge
Low risk: Conventional targets and cyberattacks
Most analysts have concluded that Israel must mount a response to Iran following Tuesday’s ballistic missile assault.
Matthew Savill, Director of Military Sciences at the RUSI think tank, told MailOnline: ‘Israel can’t be in the position of tolerating direct attacks from ballistic missiles on its territory, especially if those attacks increase in scale and begin to put pressure on the missile defence system.’
But they have also warned Tel Aviv must take into account the consequences of its response, given that a particularly punishing blow would only serve to ramp up tensions and hasten the prospect of an all-out war.
With that in mind, a strike on Iranian conventional military targets is seen as the safest way for Israel to effectively exact revenge.
These include radar and air defence sites, missile launch facilities, Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps bases, and other infrastructure that are used to conduct traditional military operations.
Other targets that fall into this category are military storage, manufacturing and production assets, such as locations involved in the development of Iran‘s ballistic missile arsenal.
Attacking these targets serves the dual purpose of degrading Iran’s capacity to launch further strikes on Israel and underscoring Tel Aviv‘s willingness to engage in an armed conflict to defend itself.
Savill said such a move would ’emphasise Israel’s military superiority over Iran and widen the gap’, while crucially not escalating the conflict to a level that would necessitate an even harsher retort from Tehran.
Meanwhile, a campaign of cyber or covert sabotage operations – the likes of which could include an attack similar to the one that saw thousands of Hezbollah communications devices explode – remains an option.
But Savill pointed out this response ‘may not meet the threshold to be considered ”strong” enough as a response to a massed ballistic missile attack’.
A missile is launched during a military exercise in an undisclosed location in the south of Iran, in this handout image obtained on January 19, 2024
A handout photo made available by the Iranian Army office on 19 January 2024 shows a missile being launched during a military drill in the Persian Gulf, southern Iran
Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in Tehran, Iran on August 27, 2024
Medium risk: Oil and gas facilities
In the immediate aftermath of Iran’s missile strikes across Israel on Tuesday, reports emerged that Israeli officials were mulling over the prospect of launching a retaliatory strike on Tehran’s oil and gas infrastructure.
Iran is the third biggest producer of crude oil in the OPEC group of oil-producing countries and is heavily reliant on exports of crude and gas to prop up its ailing economy amid years of sanctions.
The Islamic Republic is currently producing more than a staggering three million barrels a day, placing it at a five-year high, and between January and May of this year exported some 1.56 million barrels a day, primarily to China.
A consolidated assault on one or more of its vital refineries and terminals could have significant consequences for Tehran – and such tactics have already proven effective.
During the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988, Saddam Hussein’s military ruthlessly targeted Iranian oil tankers and refineries in an effort to cut off the Islamic Republic’s regime’s primary revenue stream, severely damaging the nation’s economy.
There are three primary targets likely being considered by Israel, chief among which is Kharg Island.
This small spit of land adrift some 25 kilometres off Iran’s southern coastline in the northern Persian Gulf has essentially been turned into a massive oil facility – the Kharg Oil Terminal – which is said to be responsible for some 90 per cent of Iran’s crude exports worldwide.
Other assets include Iran’s Abadan refinery – one of the most important domestic sources of Iranian oil production – and the Hormozgan oil terminals.
Located just 15 miles off Iran’s Northern coast, Kharg Island was once the world’s largest offshore crude oil terminal
A view of oil facilities on the Kharg island on the Persian Gulf about 1,250km south of Tehran on February 23, 2016
US Senator Lindsey Graham said earlier this week he was in favour of attacking Iran’s oil facilities, declaring he would ‘urge the Biden administration to coordinate an overwhelming response with Israel, starting with Iran’s ability to refine oil’ in the wake of Tehran’s missile barrage.
Graham said Iran’s oil refineries should be ‘hit and hit hard’ – but his call may not be welcomed in Washington.
Unlike a strike on military targets, an attack designed to cripple Iran’s oil production and export capacities could significantly disrupt global oil prices.
It could also prompt Iran to finally follow through on one of its long-held threats.
The Strait of Hormuz – a narrow waterway through which roughly 20 per cent of the world’s oil flows – serves as a critical chokepoint for global energy supplies.
If Israel moves to hit Iran’s oil infrastructure, Tehran may seek to block the strait, cutting off vital oil exports from all the Gulf states and triggering a global crisis that would see the price of crude skyrocket.
High risk: Nuclear facilities and top Iranian officials
Several prominent figures in Israel, including former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, have already called for the destruction of Iran’s nuclear programme – the path of retaliation that is perhaps the most fraught with danger.
Iran’s only functioning nuclear power plant, Bushehr – which is currently undergoing upgrades and is receiving additional reactors with the help of Russia – presents one possible target.
But Israel is more likely to focus on uranium enrichment plants deemed vital to the development of nuclear weapons.
For decades Tehran claimed it had pursued nuclear capabilities for energy and scientific purposes, but Western nations are wary that Khamenei’s regime aims to create a nuclear arsenal.
Amid the decline of Iran’s relations with Israel and its Western allies, Iran’s state-run media recently trumpeted that it now has enough enriched uranium to create 10 nuclear warheads in the coming months – though there is no way of verifying the claim.
Retired US Army Colonel Jonathan Sweet and security expert Mark Toth told MailOnline that Israel could certainly damage Tehran’s burgeoning nuclear programme, given its huge technological advantages and US-supplied weaponry.
‘(An Israeli attack) could take the form of the IDF striking Iran’s nuclear sites in an effort to kill two birds with one stone.
‘This would constitute a firm deterrent and could markedly set back Khamenei’s nuclear weapons programme.
‘Israel could deploy one or all of its long-range assets to strike those targets – F-35 stealth fighter-bombers, precision deep-strike ballistic missiles, and/or ICBM-equipped submarines.
‘This would not be easy, however – there are 38 known sites spread throughout Iran including Natanz and Fordow – and undoubtedly more.’
But RUSI’s Savill warned such a move may actually have the opposite of the desired effect.
He argued that Israel would be unlikely to completely dismantle the Iranian nuclear programme, and that any attempt to do so could encourage Tehran to accelerate its timeline to develop a weapon.
A satellite image and graphic shows a view of Iran’s heavily guarded underground uranium enrichment facility, Fordow
Various centrifuge machines line the halls at the Natanz Uranium Enrichment Facility, some 320km south of Tehran
The cities of Natanz and Isfahan in central Iran are home to the heart of Iran’s nuclear programme
‘Israel alone can inflict serious damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities, but it probably can’t destroy the deepest-buried ones without US assistance.
‘Iran has expanded Uranium enrichment volume and purity to the extent that it might only take a few weeks to have sufficient enriched for a weapon. However, there isn’t evidence that it has a weapon or delivery system ready.
‘A strike now might encourage Iran to believe that weaponisation is its only remaining defence,’ he concluded.
US President Biden has already implored Israel to forego strikes on Iran‘s nuclear facilities.
Speaking after a conference call between G7 leaders yesterday evening, Biden said the US supported Israel’s right to defend itself from Iranian aggression but declared ‘the answer is no’ when it came to the prospect of targeting Iran’s nuclear programme.
He said all G7 countries – the United States, Canada, Britain, Italy, France, Germany and Japan – agreed that Israel ‘has a right to respond… but they should respond proportionally’, adding the US would impose more sanctions to further target Iran’s ailing economy.
Another devastating but risky approach could be to target key figures on Iranian soil, from senior IRGC commanders and politicians up to and including President Masoud Pezeshkian – or even the Ayatollah himself.
Netanyahu appears to have strongly considered such an option.
In the wake of the Iranian missile strikes on Tuesday, he said: ‘Tehran does not understand our determination to defend ourselves and exact a price from our enemies.
‘Sinwar and Deif did not understand this; neither did Nasrallah or Mohsen,’ he said in reference to the top leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah, many of whom have been assassinated.
‘Apparently, there are those in Tehran who do not understand this either. They will,’ he concluded in a thinly veiled threat.
