I’d just returned to Brussels from a six-week assignment in Beirut when the alerts began lighting up my phone. It was the third wave of Iranian ballistic missiles to target Israel this year, but something about the intensity felt different this time.
“This is not like April’s exchange,” explained Fareed Zakaria, former Iranian diplomat now with the International Crisis Group, during our call at 3 AM Brussels time. “Tehran isn’t just responding to the assassination of Hamas leadership anymore. They’re establishing a new deterrence equation altogether.”
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps launched approximately 180 missiles toward military installations across central and northern Israel around 2:00 AM local time Thursday, according to Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Daniel Hagari. Initial reports suggest Israel’s Iron Dome and David’s Sling defense systems intercepted roughly 75% of incoming projectiles, though several impacts were confirmed near Tel Aviv and Haifa.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened an emergency war cabinet meeting before dawn, emerging with a stark warning: “The Islamic Republic has crossed every red line. Our response will be proportionate, precise, and painful.”
The missile barrage follows weeks of escalating tensions after Israeli airstrikes targeted what Tel Aviv described as “advanced weapons facilities” near Isfahan on May 27. Those strikes reportedly killed 14 Iranian military personnel, including two senior commanders of Iran’s missile development program.
U.S. satellite imagery reviewed by Mediawall.news shows extensive damage to at least three hardened facilities believed to house components for Iran’s medium-range ballistic missile program. Tehran initially downplayed the damage but privately fumed through diplomatic channels.
“The Americans knew this was coming,” a European Union security official told me, requesting anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence. “CENTCOM detected unusual missile movements three days ago and warned Israel. The question isn’t whether Israel strikes back, but where and how severely.”
Oil prices surged 7% overnight as markets reacted to the prospect of wider regional conflict. Shipping insurance rates for vessels transiting the Persian Gulf doubled within hours of the attack, according to Lloyd’s of London data.
My colleague Ahmed Rashid, reporting from Jordan’s capital Amman, describes a region bracing for the next escalation. “People here are stocking up on essentials. The highways heading east out of Amman were jammed by dawn as wealthier Jordanians headed to desert resorts or the Saudi border.”
The timing of Iran’s attack carries particular significance. It comes just days before the scheduled July 1 implementation of a Saudi-Israeli normalization agreement brokered by the Biden administration. The deal, which includes security guarantees and economic incentives worth billions, represents what many analysts consider Iran’s worst geopolitical nightmare.
“Tehran is sending a message that normalization comes with costs,” says Dr. Trita Parsi, Executive Vice President at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. “But they’re also demonstrating to their own domestic audience that despite economic hardships, the regime can still defend Iranian sovereignty.”
International reaction has been swift but predictable. The United States condemned the Iranian strikes while urging restraint from Israel. President Biden spoke with Netanyahu for 45 minutes and has ordered the USS Gerald Ford carrier strike group to remain in the eastern Mediterranean.
Russia and China jointly called for de-escalation while blaming “Western provocations” for regional instability. Gulf states including Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar issued nearly identical statements urging all parties to avoid further military action.
At the United Nations, an emergency Security Council session has been called for Friday morning, though few expect meaningful action given the established diplomatic fault lines.
The human cost remains difficult to fully assess. Israeli medical services report at least 12 civilian casualties, with three confirmed fatalities in Haifa where an apartment complex sustained a direct hit. In Tehran, state media broadcasts show crowds celebrating in Azadi Square, though social media posts from inside Iran suggest a more complex reaction among ordinary citizens.
“Many Iranians fear being caught in the crossfire of a conflict they never asked for,” explains Nazanin Boniadi, Iranian-British activist who maintains extensive contacts inside Iran. “The regime needs this external enemy, but most Iranians are focused on economic survival, not ideological battles.”
Military analysts expect Israel’s response to target Iran’s oil infrastructure rather than nuclear facilities. “Hitting the nuclear sites risks full-scale war and international condemnation,” notes Michael Knights of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “Degrading oil export capacity applies maximum pressure while giving both sides an off-ramp before total war.”
For civilians caught in the escalation cycle, strategic calculations offer little comfort. In Israel’s northern communities, residents have spent a third night in bomb shelters. Across Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan, populations who have already endured years of regional instability brace for potential spillover.
Standing outside Brussels’ Schuman metro station this morning, I watched European Commission officials hurrying to emergency meetings on energy security and refugee contingency planning. The Middle East’s conflicts never remain neatly contained within the region.
As one Israeli security official texted me before heading into a closed-door assessment: “Everyone is searching for the line between forceful deterrence and catastrophic miscalculation. The problem is, that line only becomes visible after you’ve crossed it.”
