Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Israel-Hamas
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • North Korea
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Middle East / Failed U.S. foreign policy principles led to Iran-Israel escalation
Middle East, Iran, Israel, Israel‑Hamas

April 23, 2024

Failed U.S. foreign policy principles led to Iran-Israel escalation

By Alexander Langlois

Israel and Iran recently exchanged direct fire on each other’s sovereign territories, marking a historic escalation between the two regional rivals at a time of intense instability in West Asia. While the latest Israeli strike on Iran’s central city of Isfahan on April 19 could be an attempt to de-escalate while saving face, the risk of a broader regional war with global implications remains unacceptably high. Fighting in Gaza and renewed strikes on US military positions in Syria harm the prospect of mitigating this risk, highlighting that the best solution to prevent a conflict is an Israel-Hamas ceasefire.

Indeed, Gaza is driving fighting along multiple fronts in what can be described as a regional conflict short of full-blown war. Following an illegal Israeli strike on the Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus on April 1, Tehran conducted a significant, coordinated attack at Israel proper on April 13 for the first time in their long-running rivalry, launching upwards of 350 rockets, drones, and ballistic missiles at military compounds supposedly responsible for the attack. This led to the April 19 strikes on Isfahan and other parts of the region. Iranian militias likely conducted the later strikes on US positions.

To be sure, the incidents following the Israeli strike on Damascus appear to be calculated to inflict a level of harm short of spurring total war — reflecting strong deterrence considerations. Iranian officials say they warned multiple countries of a pending attack following April 1 in an apparent attempt to allow regional actors and the United States the ability to counter its actions. Similarly, Israel telegraphed vague language in response to that attack amid widespread condemnation of Iran and calls for Israel to “take the win,” according to a call between US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Read at Inkstick

Author

Alexander
Langlois

Contributing Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

op-edGrand strategy, Middle East

As Donald Trump prepares for Middle East visit, his efforts there aren’t inspiring

By Daniel DePetris

May 6, 2025

Press ReleaseHouthis, Air power, Middle East, Military analysis, Yemen

Ending strikes on Yemen: Good news if it sticks

By Rosemary Kelanic

May 6, 2025

op-edIran, Middle East

Trump needs his team on the same Iran page

By Daniel DePetris

May 5, 2025

op-edYemen, Air power, Houthis, Iran, Middle East

In Yemen, Trump risks falling into an ‘airpower trap’ that has drawn past US presidents into costly wars

By William Walldorf

May 5, 2025

ExplainerMiddle East, China, Europe and Eurasia

China can’t dominate the Middle East

By Rosemary Kelanic

May 5, 2025

op-edIran, Middle East, Nuclear weapons

A Less Maximalist Approach To Get a Deal With Iran

By William Walldorf

April 30, 2025

Events on Middle East

See All Events
virtualSyria, Balance of power, Basing and force posture, Counterterrorism, Middle East, Military analysis

Past Virtual Event: Syria after Assad: Prospects for U.S. withdrawal

February 21, 2025
virtualMiddle East, Alliances, Diplomacy, Israel, Military analysis

Past Virtual Event: Assessing a formal U.S.-Saudi alliance

October 17, 2024
virtualHouthis, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Middle East, Yemen

Past Virtual Event: Houthi conundrum: defend, degrade, or defer

March 28, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved