Iran Updates August 2024

Iran Update, August 31, 2024

At least two Palestinian fighters attempted to carry out two coordinated car bombing attacks in the Gush Etzion area of the West Bank on August 30.[i] No militia has claimed responsibility for the attack at the time of writing, though the attack targeting IDF settlements is consistent with recent Hamas threats to target Israeli settlers in the West Bank. According to an initial IDF probe, the two militants set out together from the Hebron area towards Gush Etzion–a cluster of Israeli settlements south of Jerusalem–to carry out coordinated attacks in two locations.[ii] One fighter set off a car bomb at a gas station at the Gush Etzion junction.[iii] The fighter shot at IDF forces who arrived at the scene.[iv] IDF forces shot and killed the fighter. The second fighter breached the entrance to the Israeli Karmei Tzur settlement, located within the Gush Etzion area, approximately twenty minutes later.[v] The second fighter tried to run over the security guard at the Karmei Tzur settlement entrance, resulting in a car chase with Israeli security guards.[vi] The IDF stated that an explosive device in the attacker‘s vehicle detonated during the exchange of fire.[vii] IDF forces shot and killed the second fighter.[viii] Israeli media reported that the two car bombs were packed with ”makeshift explosive devices” and packed with nails and screws.[ix] An initial IDF probe into the attacks found that the two explosives came from the same bomb-making lab in Hebron.[x] The IDF located and destroyed an explosives laboratory in Hebron on August 31.[xi] The IDF discovered the lab as part of the operation following the identification of the suspects.[xii]  Three Israelis were inadvertently hurt during the attacks.[xiii]

An Israeli military correspondent reported that the Palestinian Authority Health Ministry said that two Hebron residents were responsible for the attack[xiv] Israeli forces detained six Palestinians who are suspected to have been involved in the Gush Etzion attack.[xv] Various Palestinian militias in the West Bank and Gaza Strip praised the attack.[xvi] The IDF and Shin Bet are investigating whether the attack was carried out by ”foreign threats.”[xvii] Israeli security officials believe a terrorist cell operating in Hebron intends to carry out additional attacks using similar tactics, which would be consistent with recent Hamas threats to conduct attacks targeting Israeli settlers and troops in the West Bank..[xviii] No militia has claimed responsibility for the attack at the time of writing, however. These attempted bombings follow four consecutive days of significant IDF military operations in the West Bank.[xix] Palestinian militias, including Hamas, have repeatedly called on Palestinians in the West Bank to attack Israelis.[xx]

Key Takeaways:

• West Bank: At least two Palestinian fighters attempted to carry out two coordinated car bombing attacks in the Gush Etzion area of the West Bank on August 30. No militia has claimed responsibility for the attack at the time of writing, though the attack targeting IDF settlements is consistent with recent Hamas threats to target Israeli settlers in the West Bank.
• Gaza Strip: The IDF Air Force targeted and killed PIJ's Central Camps Brigade commander Muhammad Qatrawi in the central Gaza Strip on August 30.
• Northern Israel: Lebanese Hezbollah conducted at least six attacks into northern Israel since CTP-ISW's last data cutoff on August 30.
• Red Sea: The Houthis claimed an attack targeting Liberian-flagged container ship M/V GROTON in the Gulf of Aden on August 31.

Iran Update, August 30, 2024

Israel and Hamas are reportedly reviewing a draft agreement for the hostage-prisoner exchange component of ceasefire talks after working group-level negotiations over the exchange.[i] The agreement states that Hamas should release 33 living hostages who are women, men over the age of 50, and hostages with serious medical conditions. If there are not 33 living hostages to return in these groups, the difference between the two should include the bodies of dead hostages. Israel has provided a list of 33 hostages to Hamas that the Israel says meet these conditions. In exchange, Israel will release “several hundred” Palestinian prisoners, including 150 serving life sentences for killing Israelis. Those who were sentenced to life in prison will be exiled and barred from returning to the Gaza Strip or the West Bank. Hamas has transferred a list of prisoners to Israel according to Israeli officials. Senior Israeli officials claimed that negotiations have made “significant progress” although no agreement has been reached yet.

Working-group talks have not resolved the issue of Israeli forces remaining along the Philadelphi Corridor.[ii] An unspecified senior official from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office reported that the Israeli security cabinet voted on August 29 in favor of retaining Israel’s presence along the Philadelphi Corridor, thus cementing an Israeli presence in the corridor as official policy.[iii] Israeli officials said on August 23 that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to withdraw Israeli forces from a one- to two-kilometer section of the Philadelphi Corridor during the first phase of the proposed ceasefire-hostage deal.[iv] Netanyahu’s insistence on an Israeli military presence along the Philadelphi Corridor has been one of the most significant sticking points in the negotiations.[v] Netanyahu has said that retaining a presence in the corridor is required to achieve Israeli war aims.

Mediators are attempting to bridge the remaining gaps through “mediation formulas” before presenting a single draft proposal to Israel and Hamas to implement, according to unspecified senior Israeli officials cited by Walla.[vi] Unspecified senior US and Israeli officials also claimed that the agreement should meet “most” of Hamas’ demands, including a minimum six-week ceasefire, the release of hundreds of prisoners, the return of displaced Palestinians to their homes, the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and rehabilitation and medical treatment in Egypt for wounded Hamas fighters.

Key Takeaways:

• Gaza Ceasefire Talks: Israel and Hamas are reportedly reviewing a draft agreement for the hostage-prisoner exchange component of ceasefire talks after working group-level negotiations over the exchange. Working-group talks have not resolved the issue of Israeli forces remaining along the Philadelphi Corridor. Mediators are attempting to bridge the remaining gaps in ceasefire talks through “mediation formulas” before presenting a single draft proposal to Israel and Hamas to implement.
• Philadelphi Corridor: An unspecified senior official from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office reported that the Israeli security cabinet voted on August 29 in favor of retaining Israel’s presence along the Philadelphi Corridor, thus cementing an Israeli presence in the corridor as official policy.
• Iranian Nuclear Program: An unspecified Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) official told Iraqi media that Iran is attempting to use its nuclear program to pressure Western countries as part of nuclear negotiations, which would be consistent with statements by the supreme leader and other Iranian officials indicating interest in renewed negotiations. It is not clear why this unspecified AEOI official would speak with Iraqi media before speaking to Iranian media. The level of access this official has within AEOI and Iranian policymaking is also unclear.

Iran Update, August 29, 2024

US and international health officials confirmed on August 29 that Israel has agreed to implement a temporary humanitarian pause in the Gaza Strip to vaccinate children against polio.[1] The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office emphasized that the pause is not related to the longer-term ceasefire proposal currently under discussion in Doha.[2] The temporary humanitarian pause related to polio received support from the Israeli War Cabinet.[3] The Gaza Health Ministry announced on August 16 that several Palestinian children have presented symptoms consistent with polio and that lab tests confirmed that one child had polio.[4] The World Health Organization representative for the Gaza Strip said that Israel agreed to suspend offensive operations for three days in designated areas of the central Gaza Strip beginning on September 1 when a large-scale vaccination campaign will begin.[5] The IDF will pause operations from 0600 to 1500 local time in the designated areas. Israel will also conduct three day pauses in designated areas of the southern and northern Gaza Strip on later, unspecified dates.[6] Unspecified Egyptian officials told Arab media that the pause would not include areas of the Gaza Strip where Israeli forces are actively operating.[7] Hamas initially welcomed the temporary pause in fighting but later criticized the Israeli proposal for not encompassing the entire Gaza Strip.[8] A Hamas political bureau official confirmed that Hamas would cooperate with international organizations for the successful implementation of the campaign, however.[9]  A United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) official said on August 26 that over 3,000 people in health teams would help deliver polio vaccines to shelters, clinics, and schools, but that a humanitarian pause was needed for locals to safely meet aid workers.[10]

Israeli military sources said that IDF operations in Rafah caused the “collapse” of Hamas’ Rafah Brigade.[11] An Israeli military correspondent reported on August 29 that Hamas fighters have increasingly attempted to flee Rafah via tunnels north to the al Mawasi humanitarian zone, citing unspecified Israeli military sources.[12] This reporting follows Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant’s announcement on August 21 that the IDF 162nd Division has defeated Hamas’ Rafah Brigade.[13]

Hamas’ recent attack rate in Rafah indicates that the Rafah Brigade may be severely degraded. CTP-ISW has observed Hamas’ weekly rate of attacks in Rafah steadily decline since the IDF began its offensive in Rafah on May 7, and Hamas attacks in August have continued to decline compared to July’s rate of attacks. The rate of Hamas attacks began to decline dramatically around August 13, however. Hamas did not claim an attack for six days between August 13 and August 19 while the 162nd Division conducted its multi-day clearing operation in Tal al Sultan. Hamas has only conducted nine attacks targeting Israeli forces since August 19 as of this writing.[14] Hamas elements can still conduct attacks even if the Rafah Brigade is severely degraded. Hamas has not conducted any attacks in the Rafah area since August 23, however. CTP-ISW will continue to monitor the status of the Rafah Brigade over the coming days.

Recent Hamas attacks have also appeared to lack clear tactical or operational objectives, unlike Hamas actions in May, June, and July. The IDF identified in late July, for example, that several Hamas fighters planned to take control of a humanitarian aid route in Rafah.[15] Hamas has previously also conducted numerous attacks in the Rafah area in which it used sophisticated weaponry or demonstrated significant planning, coordination, and organization.[16]  Such planning and coordination would be consistent with an effective military unit. Recent Hamas activity in the month of August have demonstrated neither clear objectives nor sophisticated weaponry or planning, suggesting that Hamas has lost the capabilities to conduct these types of attacks. These attacks appear to be largely simple attacks that targeted Israeli forces operating in Tal al Sultan with rocket-propelled grenades (RPG) or improvised explosive devices (IED).[17] The IDF has continued to clear Tal al Sultan in recent days and killed dozens of Palestinian fighters without any claimed Hamas attacks.[18] Smaller Palestinian militias allied with Hamas have continued to target Israeli forces in the area, however, and can continue to target Israeli forces along the Philadelphi Corridor, even if Hamas is severely degraded.

Iran has increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels, according to an unreleased International Atomic Energy Agency report obtained by the Associated Press.[19] The Associated Press reported on August 29 that Iran possesses 164.7 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60 percent, citing an unreleased IAEA report.[20] This amount marks a 22.6 kilogram increase in Iran's stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium since the IAEA published its last report in May 2024.[21] The IAEA report also verified that Iran has completed the installation of eight cascades of IR-6 centrifuges at Fordow and 10 out of 18 planned cascades of IR-2m centrifuges at Natanz.[22] The Fordow cascades are not yet operational. The IAEA noted that the installation of two new cascades at Natanz is ongoing and that Iran continues to increase the number of operating cascades of IR-2m and IR-4 centrifuges.[23] Unspecified diplomats told Reuters on June 12 that Iran is installing new centrifuges at its nuclear facilities at Natanz and Fordow, which increases the Iranian capacity to enrich uranium.[24] These diplomats and the IAEA report are presumably referring to the same cascades of centrifuges. The IAEA report said that Iran's overall stockpile of enriched uranium is 5,751.8 kilograms as of August 17.[25] This report follows continued statements from senior Iranian officials since early 2024, including a statement from a top foreign policy adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, that have begun to normalize discussions about Iran's ability to procure nuclear weapons.[26]

Unspecified sources familiar with the ongoing ceasefire-hostage negotiations told Israeli media on August 28 that Israeli mediators have made “progress” during negotiations in Doha.[27] The Israeli sources said that mediators discussed a hostage-prisoner exchange and the future of the IDF’s deployment in the Gaza Strip.[28] The sources claimed that Israel demanded that Hamas release 20 to 25 Israeli hostages during the first stage of the ceasefire.[29] Hamas reportedly only agreed to release 12 living hostages.[30] The sources said that discussions about the IDF’s presence along the Philadelphi and Netzarim Corridors–which have been the two primary sticking points of the negotiations so far–will take place in the later stages of the negotiations.[31]

Key Takeaways:

• Polio Vaccinations in the Gaza Strip: US and international health officials confirmed on August 29 that Israel has agreed to implement a temporary humanitarian pause in the Gaza Strip to vaccinate children against polio.
• Gaza Strip: Israeli military sources said that IDF operations in Rafah caused the “collapse” of Hamas’ Rafah Brigade. Hamas’ recent attack rate in Rafah indicates that the Rafah Brigade may be severely degraded. Recent Hamas attacks have also appeared to lack clear tactical or operational objectives, unlike Hamas actions in May, June, and July.
• Nuclear Negotiations: Iran has increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels, according to an unreleased International Atomic Energy Agency report obtained by the Associated Press.
• Israel-Hamas ceasefire-hostage negotiations: Unspecified sources familiar with the ongoing ceasefire-hostage negotiations told Israeli media on August 28 that Israeli mediators have made “progress” during negotiations in Doha

Iran Update, August 28, 2024

Israeli forces conducted a large-scale counterterrorism operation in the West Bank on August 27 in order to degrade Palestinian militia networks there.[1] The operation is responding to Hamas’ attempted suicide bombing in Tel Aviv on August 18 and is meant at least partly to prevent future suicide bombings in Israel. Israeli forces launched raids into Nablus, Qabatiya, Silat al Khartia, al Fara refugee camp, Jenin refugee camp, and Nour al Shams refugee camp as part of the counterterrorism operation.[2] Israeli forces also conducted drone strikes around Jenin and al Fara refugee camp, killing several Palestinian fighters.[3] The Israeli security establishment assessed that previous Israeli raids into the West Bank in recent months have failed to sufficiently degrade militia networks there and that the militias, including Hamas, would be capable of conducting additional suicide bombings targeting Israeli civilians in the coming weeks.[4]

Hamas planning suicide bombings in Israel marks a tactical shift in how Hamas tries to impose costs on the Israeli population. Hamas has primarily used rocket attacks to this end in recent years. But the Hamas rocket stockpile in the Gaza Strip is dwindling, making this option decreasingly viable.[5] Hamas claimed responsibility for the attempted suicide bombing in Tel Aviv on August 18, marking the first such claim since 2008.[6] Israeli authorities said that the attacker was from the West Bank and assessed that his explosive device was manufactured there, reflecting the threat that the militias there pose to Israel.[7] Senior Hamas official Khaled Meshal responded to the Israeli counterterrorism operation in the West Bank by threatening future suicide bombings in Israel.[8]

The United Kingdom-based Jewish Chronicle reported on August 28 of worsening internal fissures among Palestinian militias in the Gaza Strip.[9] The outlet reported that several militias have considered in recent months conducting a “coup“ against Hamas. These militias include Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the Mujahidin Brigades, the al Nasser Salah al Din Brigades, and the al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades.[10] These Palestinian militias have actively supported Hamas throughout the war but have come to disagree with Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar over the identities and numbers of Palestinian prisoners from the smaller militias to be released in a hostage-prisoner exchange with Israel.[11] Sinwar has, according to the Jewish Chronicle, demanded that Israel prioritize releasing Hamas members--rather than members of the other militias--in negotiations. Emirati media reported that that Sinwar Egyptian mediators shortly after his selection as Hamas’ new political leader that he wanted to prioritize the release of Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti and PFLP leader Ahmed Saadat, possibly to placate the militias.[12] CTP-ISW cannot verify either report. US White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby said on August 26 that negotiations are continuing in Cairo and that international mediators will discuss more detailed and granular issues than previously, including which Palestinian prisoners would be released by Israel in exchange for Israeli hostages.[13]  

Iranian Armed Forces General Staff Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri restated on August 28 the Iranian intent to attack Israel in retaliation for killing Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran.[14] Bagheri said that Iran will conduct a “calculated” retaliation against Israel. Bagheri and other senior Iranian military officials have repeatedly said in recent weeks that Iran would conduct such an attack.[15] These statements are especially noteworthy given that these officials would be involved in the planning and execution of an attack CTP-ISW continues to assess that Iran will likely attack Israel directly. Iran has likely delayed its attack until now in part to stoke anxiety and fear among the Israeli public.[16]

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has begun paving an asphalt road along the Philadelphi Corridor between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. Commercially available satellite imagery captured on August 26 showed that the IDF paved an asphalt road along a section of the corridor that begins near the Swedish Village along the Mediterranean Sea and extends approximately 300 to 400 meters east. An Israeli journalist posted a photo on August 25 of the newly paved road.[17] The IDF paving of the road is consistent with a report by Lebanese outlet al Akhbar on August 26 that claimed that international mediators discussed possible Israeli concessions during ceasefire-hostage talks in Cairo on August 25.[18] One reported amendment included a gradual—rather than immediate—Israeli withdrawal from the Philadelphi Corridor and allowed the IDF to pave an asphalt road along the corridor as long as it did not conduct further construction that would change the “current status quo” of Israeli control over the corridor.[19] Paving the Philadelphi Corridor will make it harder for Palestinian militias to plant improvised explosive devices (IED) along it.

Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Abbas Araghchi held a phone call with Hamas head negotiator Khalil al Hayya on August 28 to discuss the status of ongoing ceasefire-hostage negotiations and the situation in the Gaza strip.[20] Araghchi claimed that Iran will accept any ceasefire agreement that is accepted by Hamas and the Palestinian people. Araghchi and Hayya also discussed Israeli efforts to "change the situation in the al Aqsa mosque", referring to Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s recent comment about wanting to construct a synagogue in the al Aqsa Mosque complex.[21]

Russian state-run newswire TASS plans to open an office in Iran, supporting Moscow’s efforts to deepen its partnership with Tehran.[22] TASS Director General Andrei Kondrashov announced on August 28 that TASS will open a correspondent office in Iran, adding to the 62 offices that TASS has in 57 other countries.[23] Iran and Russia have deepened their strategic partnership, including economic, military, and political cooperation, over the backdrop of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. TASS's expansion into Iran indicates growing media cooperation between Moscow and Tehran as well.[24]

Key Takeaways:

• West Bank: Israeli forces launched a large-scale counterterrorism operation into the West Bank to degrade militia networks there. The operation is partly a response to the Palestinian militias there building the capability to conduct suicide bombing attacks in Israel.
• Gaza Strip: There are reportedly worsening internal fissures among Palestinian militias in the Gaza Strip. Some militias have reportedly considered conducting a “coup” against Hamas in response to disagreements over the ceasefire-hostage negotiations with Israel.
• Iran: Iranian AFGS Chief Mohammad Bagheri restated the Iranian intent to retaliate for Israel killing Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. Iran has delayed its attack at least partly to stoke anxiety and fear among the Israeli public.
• Israel-Hamas ceasefire-hostage negotiations: The IDF has begun paving an asphalt road along the Philadelphi Corridor between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. Paving the route will make it harder for Palestinian militias to plant IEDs along it.

Iran Update, August 27, 2024

Iran has tried to insert itself into the ceasefire-hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas since Israel killed Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, according to regional sources speaking to Emirati media.[1] An anonymous source told the outlet that Iran has become a “key behind-the-scenes player” in the negotiations.[2] Senior Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Affairs Minister Abbas Araghchi, have repeatedly engaged Egyptian and Qatari mediators in recent weeks, as CTP-ISW has reported.[3] Iran trying to insert itself into the negotiations is consistent with CTP-ISW's assessment that some elements of the Iranian regime, possibly from the Pezeshkian administration, are likely trying to delay an Iranian attack on Israel until the negotiations conclude.[4]Pezeshkian seeks to avoid a direct strike on Israel and has instead reportedly advocated for targeting “secret Israeli bases” in Iraqi Kurdistan and Azerbaijan.[5]

An anonymous political source in Lebanon separately told Emirati media that Iran has used the threat of an attack on Israel to obtain a “bigger role in the Palestinian file.”[6] It is unclear what this role would entail. The source added that Egypt sought to postpone an Iranian attack on Israel, which Iran may have done in exchange for this expanded influence.[7]

CTP-ISW continues to assess that an Iranian attack on Israel is the most likely Iranian course of action. US White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby said on August 27 that Iran is “still postured and poised” to attack Israel.[8] Kirby added that the United States will maintain its deterrent military posture in the Middle East “as long as we feel we need to keep it in place to defend Israel and defend our own troops and facilities in the region.”[9] Iranian Deputy Defense Minister Brigadier General Hojatollah Qureishi separately warned on August 27 that Iran’s response to Israel will be “unpredictable.”[10] The Iranian ambassador to Lebanon similarly claimed on August 26 that Iran will “certain[ly]” retaliate against Israel.[11] Qureishi and the Iranian ambassador to Lebanon would not be responsible for planning an Iranian attack on Israel, however.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Shin Bet rescued Israeli hostage Qaid Farhan al Qadi from an underground tunnel in the southern Gaza Strip on August 27.[12] The IDF 401st Brigade, Shayetet 13 naval commandos, Yahalom combat engineers, and Shin Bet forces conducted the operation under the IDF 162nd Division.[13] Israeli forces did not encounter resistance from Palestinian fighters during the operation and located al Qadi alone in the tunnel complex where Hamas held him captive.[14] Two security sources told Israeli Army Radio that al Qadi escaped from his captors and reached Israeli forces in the tunnel.[15] The IDF did not specify where in the southern Gaza Strip Israeli forces found Qadi, but two Israeli brigades have been conducting daily raids in Tal al Sultan since August 19.[16] IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi and the commanders approved Israeli forces’ "continuation of activity" on the ground after the rescue operation ended.[17] Al Qadi is the first living hostage whom the IDF has recovered from an underground tunnel in the war.  

Israel’s hostage negotiations envoy described in a recent interview a period around July 2024 when Israeli negotiators felt optimistic about securing a ceasefire-hostage deal with Hamas.[18] Brigadier General (ret.) Gal Hirsch, who is Benjamin Netanyahu’s appointed hostage envoy, spoke with former Israeli reporter and television host Nadav Perry on August 25.[19] Hirsch is a close associate of Netanyahu and has been involved in high-level meetings with Israeli diplomats throughout the negotiations with Hamas.[20] Hirsch pointed to a period in mid-to-late July 2024 in which Netanyahu and Israeli negotiators felt that they were “advancing” and making progress in talks with Hamas.[21] This period began after Hamas rejected an Israeli-accepted, US-drafted proposal on June 11 in a formal response that reiterated that Hamas’ maximalist demands be met.[22] The proposal that Hamas rejected reportedly included unspecified Israeli provisions to meet Hamas’ maximalist demands but did not guarantee them.[23] Hirsch said that Israel decided to ”stand firm” in its position and refused to compromise following Hamas’ rejection of the proposal.[24] Israel’s adopted uncompromising stance, as described by Hirsch, was a departure from Israel’s previous reported willingness to compromise to meet Hamas’ demands in the US-drafted proposal. Netanyahu publicly embraced this uncompromising posture and said on July 13 that he would be “not budge a millimeter from the outline that President Biden welcomed.”[25]

Hamas began to more constructively engage Israeli negotiators in response to Israel’s refusal to compromise and its ongoing operations in the Gaza Strip, according to Hirsch.[26] Hirsch said that Hamas stopped demanding the end of the war in Gaza Strip as a condition for negotiations and began to make new demands that allowed actual negotiations to take place.[27] Israeli negotiators were internally optimistic about Hamas’ slightly positive movement at this time.[28] Israeli and US officials said on July 11 that Hamas had “softened” some of its positions, allowing the talks to make progress.[29] Netanyahu said on July 22 that the deal was ”ripening” while US President Biden said that negotiators were ”on the verge” of achieving a deal.[30] It is notable that Biden and Netanyahu were slightly less optimistic, though both leaders clearly saw a way to progress the talks. It was within this context that Israel submitted an updated ceasefire proposal to the United States on July 27.[31] Senior US, Egyptian, and Qatari officials convened in Rome on July 28 to discuss the updated proposal.[32] Israeli negotiators said that they emerged from the Rome summit pessimistic about the future of the deal, however.[33] This Israeli proposal reportedly included several new stipulations, including establishing a ”foreign mechanism” to prevent weapons from moving from the southern Gaza Strip to the northern Gaza Strip and insisting on an Israeli presence in the Gaza Strip during the ceasefire.[34] These two sticking points are still some of the principal obstacles to negotiators working towards a deal at the time of this writing.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei met with President Masoud Pezeshkian and his newly formed cabinet on August 27.[35] Khamenei focused the meeting largely on addressing economic issues. He cautioned Pezeshkian against relying overly on technocrats in his government. He also gave Pezeshkian 13 recommendations for his presidency, which are:[36]

• serving the Iranian people and striving for progress;
• recognizing Iranian capabilities, including geographic advantages and human capital;
• bringing young Iranians into government service and training them;
• avoiding the prioritization of expertise over character in government service;

• Pursue trips to all the provinces, engage with the public, and base your decisions on your observations.
• promoting socio-economic equality and justice in domestic programs;
• fixing economic issues by investing in infrastructure;
• regulating cyberspace and implementing relevant laws;
• Increasing domestic production to improve inflation and unemployment rates;
• Countering negative demographic trends;
• Confronting and overcoming obstacles;
• Being open to engaging Iranian adversaries but not trusting them; and
• paying attention to enemy behavior as statesman and serving Islam.

Khamenei’s remark on engaging adversaries without trusting them is consistent with his previous statements in recent months. Khamenei has expressed on several occasions his openness to nuclear negotiations with the West in order to remove international sanctions on Iran.[37] But Khamenei has also emphasized that building domestic capacities and resilience should be a higher priority for the Pezeshkian administration.

Key Takeaways:

• Israel-Hamas ceasefire-hostage negotiations: Iran has reportedly tried to insert itself into the ceasefire-hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas. Iran has reportedly used the threat of its attack on Israel to obtain a greater role in the “Palestinian file.”
• Gaza Strip: Israeli forces rescued an Israeli hostage in an underground tunnel in the southern Gaza Strip. The individual is the first living hostage whom Israeli forces have recovered from an underground tunnel in the war.
• Iran: Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei met with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and his newly formed cabinet. Khamenei focused the meeting on addressing economic issues. Khamenei also expressed openness to nuclear negotiations with the West.

Iran Update, August 26, 2024

CTP-ISW continues to assess that an Iranian drone and missile strike targeting Israel is the most likely Iranian course of action. The Pentagon spokesperson reported on August 26 that the United States assesses there is still a threat of strikes against Israel from Iran or its Axis of Resistance based on comments from Iranian leaders and “others.”[i] Iranian Armed Forces General Staff Chief Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri said on August 26 during a ceremony for the new Iranian Minister of Defense Brigadier General Aziz Nasir Zadeh that Iran and the Axis of Resistance will retaliate against Israel “separately and independently.”[ii] Bagheri gave this statement at a ceremony that included in its audience a large number of top Iranian commanders who would be responsible for deciding and implementing an Iranian response.[iii] Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi restated Iran’s right to respond for the death of Haniyah and warned that Iran’s response will be “definitive, accurate, and calculated” during phone calls with his foreign counterparts on August 23 and 26.[iv]

Iran will likely take lessons from Hezbollah’s attack to tailor its own retaliatory strike to fulfill Iranian objectives. CTP-ISW argued on August 25 that Iran and its Axis of Resistance could use Hezbollah’s attack in part as a reconnaissance-in-force to increase the efficacy of future attacks on Israel.[v] The US military defines reconnaissance-in-force as “a deliberate combat operation designed to discover or test the enemy’s strength, dispositions, and reactions or to obtain other information.”[vi] CTP-ISW previously noted that Iranian leaders are likely incentivized to slowly assemble a strike package that both hurts Israel and avoids escalation into a wider war.[vii] Iran could use Hezbollah’s August 24 strike to identify weaknesses in Israel’s air defenses and monitor Israel’s reaction to understand it’s redlines and willingness to retaliate.

The IDF assessed that Hezbollah launched less than 50 percent of the number of munitions it intended to launch during its August 24-25 attack on Israel. State-funded, IDF-supported Israeli Army Radio reported on August 26 that the IDF assessed that Hezbollah planned to launch 500 to 600 rockets at northern Israel and “dozens” of drones targeting central Israel in its attack.[viii] Hezbollah actually fired 200 to 300 projectiles, including approximately 20 one-way attack drones, into Israel during the attack.[ix] The IDF added that Hezbollah launched 90 percent of the rockets and drones used in its August 24-25 attack from civilian areas in Lebanon.[x] The IDF intercepted many of the approximately 20 Hezbollah drones before they reached their intended targets.[xi] Some of the 20 drones fell before reaching their target, and none of the roughly 20 drones reached their targets. The IDF assessed that Hezbollah did not try to launch precision missiles during this attack but noted that Hezbollah retains the capability to do so.[xii] Israeli Army Radio reported that Hezbollah considered firing precision missiles at the IDF Glilot Base in central Israel but decided against such a strike due to fear of a strong Israeli reaction.[xiii] Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah indicated that the August 24-25 attack was satisfactory and said that the response to senior Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr’s death is ”over.”[xiv]

Iran is discussing ongoing Gaza ceasefire negotiations with international mediators. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Abbas Araghchi separately met with Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammad al Thani in Tehran on August 26. [xv]Araghchi stated that Iran will support any agreement accepted by Hamas.[xvi] Pezeshkian expressed gratitude to Qatar for its mediation efforts and stated that Muslim countries must take ”joint action” to curb Israel.[xvii] Araghchi separately thanked Egyptian Foreign Affairs Minister Badr Abdelatty for Egypt’s mediation efforts in a phone call on August 23.[xviii]

Hamas launched a single rocket targeting Tel Aviv on August 25 from northern al Qarara, Khan Younis.[xix] The IDF was operating in al Qarara, possibly indicating that Hamas was faced with a decision to use its remaining rocket or lose it to Israeli ground operations. The IDF detected a single rocket that fell in an open area in Rishon LeZion in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area.[xx] 98th Division forces identified Hamas’ launch site and directed an airstrike targeting the launcher and other militia infrastructure near the al Qarara Secondary School in northern al Qarara.[xxi] The IDF said that secondary explosions from the airstrike indicated that there were additional rockets inside the launcher.[xxii] Hamas has maintained the strategy throughout the war of ”emptying” its rocket stockpiles as the IDF advances into an area.[xxiii] Israeli ground forces were already operating in the vicinity of the rocket launcher.[xxiv] Hamas engaged Israeli forces in al Qarara on August 26 and the 98th Division has been conducting operations in the area since at least August 18.[xxv] Hamas retains a very limited ability to continue rocket attacks targeting major Israeli population centers such as Tel Aviv as a result of current IDF operations. 

Recorded reports of attacks; CTP-ISW cannot independently verify impact.

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation: CTP-ISW continues to assess that an Iranian drone and missile strike targeting Israel is the most likely Iranian course of action. Iranian Armed Forces General Staff Chief Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri said on August 26 during a ceremony for the new Iranian Minister of Defense Brigadier General Aziz Nasir Zadeh that Iran and the Axis of Resistance will retaliate against Israel “separately and independently.” Iran will likely take lessons from Hezbollah’s attack to tailor its own retaliatory strike to fulfill Iranian objectives.
• August 24-25 Hezbollah Attack on Israel: The IDF assessed that Hezbollah launched less than 50 percent of the number of munitions it intended to launch during its August 24-25 attack on Israel.
• Iran: Iran is engaging with international mediators in the most recent round of ceasefire-hostage negotiations.
• Gaza Strip: Hamas launched a single rocket targeting Tel Aviv on August 25 from northern al Qarara, Khan Younis. The IDF was operating in al Qarara, possibly indicating that Hamas was faced with a decision to use its remaining rocket or lose it to Israeli ground operations.

Iran Update, August 25, 2024

Lebanese Hezbollah conducted a drone and rocket attack on Israel on August 24 in response to Israel killing a senior Hezbollah commander, Fuad Shukr. Hezbollah fired 200-300 projectiles, including around 20 one-way attack drones, in two waves into Israel.[1] Hezbollah fired rockets at 11 Israel Defense Forces (IDF) sites in northern Israel in the first wave of its attack.[2] These sites included a prominent IDF air defense and communications site on Mount Meron, which Hezbollah has targeted repeatedly since October 2023.[3] Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah said that the rockets were meant to distract Israeli air defenses and enable the second wave to penetrate deeper into Israel.[4] The second wave involved firing one-way attack drones targeting Ein Shemer base in Hadera and Glilot Base north of Tel Aviv.[5] This tactic of using imprecise and indirect fire to distract air defenses and then using precision weapons to strike targets has become common across Iran and its Axis of Resistance in recent years. Ein Shemer base hosts major IDF air defense assets, while Glilot base has signals intelligence functions.[6] The IDF stated that it intercepted some of the Hezbollah rocket fire in northern Israel and that Hezbollah failed to strike the bases in central Israel.[7] The IDF also reported that an IDF Navy member was killed in the Hezbollah attack.[8]

Hezbollah meant for its attack to be much larger than it was. The IDF conducted a series of preemptive strikes in southern Lebanon about 30 minutes before the attack was expected to begin.[9] The IDF Air Force struck around 40 locations and destroyed ”thousands” of Hezbollah rocket launchers and around 40 unspecified launch pads.[10] An Israeli military correspondent noted that the IDF Air Force destroyed over 200 targets ”within minutes.”[11] Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant stated that the IDF destroyed between 50 and 67 percent of the munitions that Hezbollah planned to use in the attack.[12] Israeli officials later said that only some of the rocket launchers that Hezbollah positioned appeared to be meant for use in the attack. Hezbollah may have positioned more rocket launchers than it planned to use in order to obfuscate the direction and scale of its attack.

Nasrallah gave a speech after the attack and outlined the factors that led Hezbollah to delay its attack until now.[13] Hezbollah waited nearly 30 days before responding to Israel killing Fuad Shukr in Beirut on July 30. Nasrallah said that the United States and Israeli deterrent postures affected Hezbollah decision making. Nasrallah also claimed that Hezbollah and the Axis of Resistance delayed the retaliation to allow the ceasefire-hostage talks in the Israel-Hamas war to continue. Nasrallah lastly said that Hezbollah delayed its attack to evaluate whether the Axis of Resistance would respond ”as a whole or [on] each front alone.” CTP-ISW has previously argued that these factors were driving Iran and its Axis of Resistance to delay their attacks on Israel.[14]

Hezbollah and the rest of the Axis of Resistance have indicated that the Hezbollah attack is only the beginning of their retaliation. Nasrallah said, for instance, that the Hezbollah attack is only “part of the punishment.”[15] The Houthi Political Bureau reiterated that a Houthi response to Israel is ”definitely coming.”[16] The Houthis have not yet retaliated against Israel for Israel striking on Hudaydah port, Yemen, on July 20.[17] Iran has likewise not yet retaliated against Israel for the killing of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 30.[18] Western and regional sources expect further attacks in the near future.[19]  CTP-ISW has continuously assessed that Iran and the Axis of Resistance will likely conduct a staggered attack against Israel, perhaps even spanning multiple waves across multiple days.[20]

Iran, Hezbollah, and the rest of the Axis of Resistance will likely learn lessons from the Hezbollah attack in order to improve the efficacy of future attacks on Israel, as CTP-ISW has previously warned.[21] The Hezbollah attack likely in part a reconnaissance-in-force operation. The US Army defines reconnaissance-in-force as “a deliberate combat operation designed to discover or test the enemy’s strength, dispositions, and reactions or to obtain other information.”[22] Hezbollah could thus use the attack to better understand the capabilities and disposition of Israeli air defenses. Hezbollah could also better understand how to design more effective strike packages against Israel, which could include a larger volume of fire or the use of missiles—rather than just drones and rockets. The Axis of Resistance could apply this information in separate attacks in the coming days or weeks.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei referenced the Axis of Resistance’s war against Israel during a prayer ceremony in Tehran on August 25.[23] Khamenei compared the Palestinian fight against Israel to Imam Hossein’s uprising in Karbala, Iraq, against the second Umayyad Caliphate leader in 680 AD.[24] Khamenei described how Imam Hossein had ”the goal of confronting oppression” and explained how these ”methods of confrontation” have changed in the ”age of the atom and artificial intelligence.”[25] Khamenei’s speech occurred shortly after Lebanese Hezbollah conducted its drone and rocket attack on Israel.

Hamas rejected Israel’s “new ceasefire conditions” following negotiations in Cairo on August 25.[26] A Hamas delegation led by head negotiator Khalil al Hayya arrived in Cairo on August 24 to “listen” to the results of negotiations between US, Egyptian, Israeli, and Qatari mediators.[27] Senior Hamas political official Izzat al Rishq said that the Hamas delegation met with Egyptian and Qatari mediators and left Cairo on the evening of August 25.[28] Al Rishq also said that the Hamas delegation demanded that Israel commit to the July 2024 ceasefire-hostage proposal that Hamas backs.[29] Senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan told the Hamas-run network al Aqsa TV that Hamas will not accept “retractions” or “new conditions” from the July 2024 proposal.[30] Hamdan said that Hamas has given the mediators its response to the latest proposal.[31] Hamas previously rejected the latest US-proposed ceasefire-hostage proposal following talks in Doha on August 18 and similarly accused Israel of setting ”new conditions and demands” that obstructed the negotiations.[32]    

Key Takeaways:

• Lebanese Hezbollah conducted a drone and rocket attack on Israel in response to Israel killing a senior Hezbollah commander, Fuad Shukr. Hezbollah meant for its attack to be much larger than it was.
• Hezbollah and the rest of the Axis of Resistance have indicated that the Hezbollah attack is only the beginning of their retaliation. The Axis of Resistance will likely learn lessons from the Hezbollah attack in order to improve the efficacy of future attacks on Israel.
• Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei referenced the Axis of Resistance’s war against Israel during a prayer ceremony in Tehran.
• Hamas rejected Israel’s “new ceasefire conditions” following negotiations between US, Egyptian, Israeli, and Qatari officials in Cairo.

Iran Update, August 24, 2024

A Hamas delegation arrived in Cairo on August 24 to “listen to the results of the negotiations” between US, Egyptian, Israeli and Qatari mediators.[i] Senior Hamas political official Izzat al Rishq announced that a Hamas delegation led by head negotiator Khalil al Hayya will travel to Cairo on August 24.[ii] Hamas official Mahmoud Mardawi said that the Hamas delegation is not going to Cairo to negotiate but instead will “listen closely” to the mediators.[iii] Two Egyptian security sources told Reuters that the Hamas delegation arrived in Cairo to be close to the negotiations and review the proposals.[iv] CIA Director William Burns, senior Biden administration adviser Brett McGurk, Mossad director David Barnea, Egyptian General Intelligence chief Abbas Kamel, and Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al Thani are also expected to attend the talks in Cairo.[v] US President Joe Biden spoke with al Thani on August 23 and discussed the urgency of concluding the deal under the current US bridging proposal.[vi]

Israeli officials said on August 23 that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to withdraw Israeli forces from a one-to two-kilometer section of the Philadelphi Corridor during the first phase of the proposed ceasefire-hostage deal.[vii] Three anonymous Israeli officials told Axios that President Biden asked Netanyahu to agree to withdraw Israeli forces from the Philadelphi Corridor during the first phase of the deal in their call on August 21.[viii] Netanyahu’s insistence on an Israeli military presence along the Philadelphi Corridor, which his office has said is required for achieving Israel’s war objectives, has been one of the most significant sticking points of the negotiations.[ix] Israeli officials said that Netanyahu “partially” heeded Biden’s request and agreed to withdraw the IDF from a one-to two-kilometer section of the Philadelphi Corridor adjacent to Tal al Sultan neighborhood.[x] A Netanyahu aide said that Netanyahu only agreed to change one IDF position by “a few hundred meters,” which the aide said would not impact the IDF’s operational control of the corridor.[xi] Netanyahu’s “partial” concession allowed the United States to support Israel’s position that Israeli forces remain along most of the corridor during the first phase.[xii] Egypt reportedly agreed to deliver updated maps reflecting this change to Hamas.[xiii] Egypt has maintained its firm refusal of any Israeli presence on the Philadelphi Corridor.[xiv]

US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Charles Brown Jr. began an “unannounced visit” to the Middle East on August 24.[xv] Reuters reported that General Charles Brown Jr. arrived in Jordan on August 24 and will also travel to Egypt and Israel during his visit to “hear the perspectives of military leaders.”[xvi] General Brown is expected to discuss US perspectives on a regional war between Israel and Iran’s Axis of Resistance as well as further US efforts to strengthen deterrence in the region.

Newly appointed Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated on August 24 that Iran will retaliate against Israel for killing several senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent weeks.[xvii] Araghchi told reporters that Iran will “respond to Israeli crimes” and prevent Israel from “expanding the war in the region.”[xviii] Araghchi added that the Foreign Affairs Ministry is in “complete coordination” with the Iranian armed forces. Araghchi separately discussed his recent phone calls with his French, German, and UK counterparts and stated that Iran will respond to Israel at the “right time and in the right way."[xix]

Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)-affiliated outlet Tasnim News Agency claimed on August 24 that the April 2024 Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel demonstrated Israel’s inability to counter a multifront attack from Iran and its Axis of Resistance.[xx] Tasnim News Agency claimed that a “massive” attack by Iran and its Axis of Resistance on Israel would “paralyze” Israeli and partner air defense systems. Tasnim News Agency further claimed that Israel lacks the manpower and military equipment to defend against such an attack. The article also described the April 2024 attack as a “warning operation.”

Key Takeaways:

• Hostage-ceasefire negotiations: Hamas sent a delegation to Cairo for further ceasefire-hostage consultations. Israel agreed to withdraw forces from part of the Philadelphi Corridor during the first phase of the proposed deal.
• Iran: The newly appointed Iranian foreign affairs minister reiterated that Iran will retaliate for Israel killing Ismail Haniyeh and other senior Axis of Resistance leaders. IRGC-affiliated media claimed that Israel could not counter a multi-front attack by Iran and the Axis of Resistance.

Iran Update, August 23, 2024

The factors seemingly driving Iran to delay its direct attack on Israel are temporary. These factors will disappear with time, which would increase the likelihood of an Iranian attack on Israel. These factors include ongoing ceasefire-hostage talks between Israel and Hamas, the US-Israeli deterrent posture, and internal Iranian coordination and planning. These factors are not mutually exclusive; the delay in Iran’s retaliation for Israel killing Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh could be caused by any combination of these factors. Iranian officials have suggested that Iran is delaying its retaliation to account for ceasefire-hostage talks. US President Joe Biden likewise said that he expected Iran to delay or indefinitely postpone an attack on Israel if a ceasefire-hostage deal was reached.[1] The United States explicitly communicated to Iran that Israel would mount a major military response to an Iranian attack targeting Israel, while Israel has practiced aerial refueling fighter jets to simulate “long-range flights deep into enemy territory.”[2] Iran lastly seeks to calibrate its attack on Israel in order to establish deterrence while avoiding a major war. Iran could also use the delay to plan and coordinate the strike with other, external partners and stakeholders both inside and outside the Axis of Resistance. The factors described here will not persist indefinitely, meaning that Iran will have fewer reasons to continue delaying attack over time.

The implication by US officials that the US deterrent posture in the Middle East decreases the risk of an Iranian attack would simultaneously imply that changing or removing the US deterrent posture increases the risk of an Iranian attack. The Pentagon deputy press secretary said that the arrival of the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group (CSG) to the Middle East sends a “very powerful message of deterrence,” adding that she cannot predict how long the Abraham Lincoln CSG will stay in the region but that the United States is “well-postured” to defend Israel.[3] It is far from clear that the Abraham Lincoln CSG or the arrival of other US military assets--including F22 stealth fighters and the USS Georgia guided missile submarine--the region deterred Iran, however.[4] To the extent that Iranian calculus is, in fact, affected by the US military posture in the region, the Pentagon’s statements imply that changing or removing that posture would increase the likelihood of an Iranian attack.

Maintaining the US deterrent posture in the region is possible but would be tantamount to a shift in US global priorities that is inconsistent with the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS). The 2022 NDS identifies China as the “most comprehensive and serious challenge to US national security,” Russia as an “acute threat,” and Iran as only a “persistent” threat.[5] Two of the four NDS defense priorities are “deterring strategic attacks against the United States” and its partners and “deterring aggression, while being prepared to prevail in conflict when necessary, prioritizing” the challenges posed by China and  Russia.[6] Maintaining the current deterrent posture in the Middle East indefinitely would mean de-facto deprioritizing establishing deterrence vis-a-vis China or Russia. There are currently no US CSGs in the Western Pacific as of August 23, 2024, for example, while two CSGs are in the Middle East.[7]

Newly appointed Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated in separate phone calls with his French and UK counterparts on August 23 that Iran maintains the right to attack Israel in response to Israel killing Ismail Haniyeh.[8] Araghchi told British Foreign Secretary David Lammy that Iran does not want to expand the war or increase regional tensions.

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin discussed regional developments in a phone call on August 22.[9] Gallant and Austin discussed attacks on the Israel-Lebanon border and the threats that Iran, Lebanese Hezbollah, and other Iranian-backed militias pose to Israel. Austin said that the United States will continue to monitor Iranian attack planning and added that the United States is prepared to defend Israel in the case of an attack. Austin also highlighted the importance of securing a hostage and ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas.

Palestinian sources told Israeli media that Hamas has decided to begin targeting Israeli civilians abroad, possibly due to Hamas’ decreasing ability to conduct attacks into Israel.[10] Hamas has historically targeted Israeli civilians to impose costs on Israel for operations against Hamas. Unspecified Palestinian sources told Israeli Channel 12 that Hamas took a “strategic decision” to attack Israelis abroad to avenge the death of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. Hamas may made this decision because Israeli operations have destroyed the bulk of Hamas’ rocket supply.[11] The loss of this rocket supply and improved Israeli preventative measures over the last three decades that have made the use of suicide bombers within Israel impractical and less effective means that the two tactics Hamas has historically used are decreasingly viable.[12] Hamas could collaborate with Iran to threaten Israeli civilians abroad, given that Iran has invested tremendously in building covert attack networks abroad that could be used to target Israelis.

Unspecified Hamas officials said that Hamas has rejected multiple elements of the latest US bridging proposal. Israeli officials said that there was “significant progress” after ceasefire-hostage talks in Cairo and that Egypt is prepared to give Hamas the latest proposal.[13] Two Hamas sources, however, told Reuters that the US bridging proposal does not include a permanent ceasefire and that it includes “changes [that Hamas] rejects,” including allowing an Israeli military presence “at the crossings” and the stipulation that freed Palestinian prisoners go into exile instead of returning to the Gaza Strip or West Bank.[14] Two Egyptian security officials emphasized that Israel and Hamas appeared willing to resolve all differences except the issue of an Israeli withdrawal, presumably from the Netzarim and Philadelphi corridors in particular.[15] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not changed his position on the need for Israeli control of the Philadelphi Corridor, and his office has stated that the “achievement of all of Israel’s objectives for the war requires securing” the Philadelphi Corridor.[16]

Some Iranian-backed Iraqi militias told Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al Sudani that they would refrain from attacking US forces for the moment, according to an adviser to the Iraqi federal government speaking to Lebanese media.[17] Sudani has reportedly tried to deescalate between the United States and the militias in recent days.[18] Sudani also reportedly requested that the United States refrain from attacking militia positions in exchange for the militias pausing their attacks targeting US forces.[19] This mediation comes after the militias injured five US personnel in a rocket attack in Iraq on August 5.[20] CTP-ISW is considering the hypothesis that Iran is restraining its Iraqi militias while planning its retaliation for Israel killing Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have messaged that they intend to soon resume attacks, however. A leader of the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, Ali Hussein, denied that the militias have agreed to pause attacks targeting US forces.[21] CTP-ISW has similarly reported in recent days that the militias have begun threatening to resume attacks targeting US forces in order to expel the United States from the Middle East.

Unknown gunmen shot and killed the deputy police chief for security of Khash City, Sistan and Baluchistan Province, Iran, on August 23.[22] Unknown gunmen killed officer Hossein Piri near his house after he attended Friday prayer services. Iranian state media blamed unspecified “terrorists” for the attack. Piri was dressed in civilian clothing in broad daylight, suggesting that the attack was a targeted killing. CTP-ISW has previously noted an uptick in anti-regime militancy and unrest in southeastern Iran and the increasingly precarious internal security situation there.

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation: The factors seemingly driving Iran to delay its direct attack on Israel are temporary. These factors will disappear with time, which would increase the likelihood of an Iranian attack on Israel. These factors include ongoing ceasefire-hostage talks between Israel and Hamas, the US-Israeli deterrent posture, and internal Iranian coordination and planning.
• Deterring an Iranian Retaliation: The implication by US officials that the US deterrent posture in the Middle East decreases the risk of an Iranian attack would simultaneously imply that changing or removing the US deterrent posture increases the risk of an Iranian attack. To the extent that Iranian calculus is, in fact, affected by the US military posture in the region, recent statements by Pentagon officials imply that changing or removing that posture would increase the likelihood of an Iranian attack. Maintaining the US deterrent posture in the region is possible but would be tantamount to a shift in US global priorities that is inconsistent with the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS).
• Hamas External Operations: Palestinian sources told Israeli media that Hamas has decided to begin targeting Israeli civilians abroad, possibly due to Hamas’ decreasing ability to conduct attacks into Israel.
• Gaza Strip Ceasefire: Unspecified Hamas officials said that Hamas has rejected multiple elements of the latest US bridging proposal.
• Iraq: Some Iranian-backed Iraqi militias told Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al Sudani that they would refrain from attacking US forces for the moment, according to an adviser to the Iraqi federal government speaking to Lebanese media.
• Iran: Unknown gunmen shot and killed the deputy police chief for security of Khash City, Sistan and Baluchistan Province, Iran, on August 23.

Iran Update, August 22, 2024

Iranian interest in the progress of Gaza Strip ceasefire-hostage negotiations suggests that elements of the Iranian regime are likely delaying a retaliatory strike on Israel until ceasefire talks conclude. Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps-affiliated Tasnim News Agency reported that newly appointed Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is scheduled to meet Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al Thani in Tehran "in the coming days."[1] Thani kept Iranian officials apprised of negotiation progress during the August 15-16 ceasefire talks. The timing of Thani’s visit, combined with his role as a liaison between Iran and the other negotiators, suggests that Thani is likely to discuss the ceasefire with Iranian officials during his visit.[2]  Talks between Israel and international mediators, including Qatar, restarted in Cairo on August 22 immediately before Thani’s visit to Iran.[3] Statements from Hamas and Israel suggest that disagreements over Israeli force presence in the Strip continue to be a barrier to a ceasefire agreement, however.[4] Unspecified Iranian officials told Western media on August 13 that Iran will "delay” its attack on Israel if Israel and Hamas conclude a ceasefire-hostage agreement.[5] The Iranian UN mission similarly claimed on August 20 that Iran seeks to “avoid any possible adverse impact” on the ongoing ceasefire-hostage negotiations.[6]

The Iranian security establishment may calculate that a continued delay will generate operational surprise while forgoing strategic surprise, though the continued Iranian delay has also enabled the United States to move more assets into the theater to defend against an attack. Iran has likely not retaliated against Israel up to this point because Iran very likely seeks to ensure that its next attack restores deterrence with Israel while simultaneously avoiding a large-scale war.[7] Iranian leaders are therefore incentivized to carefully and slowly calculate their next attack to ensure that the attack inflicts serious damage on Israel but does not cause mass civilian casualties. Establishing deterrence would, however, require any retaliation to be successful. Iranian and Axis of Resistance officials have repeatedly emphasized that an attack targeting Israel will occur but have sought to counteract strategic clarity with operational ambiguity on the attack’s precise timing. US officials have warned, for example, that Iran could launch a strike with ”little or no warning.” The operational surprise that Iran is trying to build is meant to increase the likelihood that an Iranian retaliation on Israel would inflict serious damage, as CTP-ISW has previously noted.[8]

Iranian decisionmaker’s delay has also enabled Israel and its allies to ready defenses and move additional military assets to the region, however. The Nimitz-Class carrier USS Abraham Lincoln arrived in the Middle East on August 21, enabling US forces to operate two carrier strike groups in the event of an Iranian attack on Israel.[9]

Houthi supreme leader Abdulmalik al Houthi highlighted the psychological effects of delaying the retaliatory strike, which is consistent with Iranian efforts to use the delay to generate psychological effects.[10] Abdulmalik said that planning is one reason for the delay but added that the delay is also creating “anxiety“ among Israeli civilians as they wait the “inevitable response“ of Hezbollah to avenge the death of Fuad Shukr, a senior Hezbollah official whom Israel killed on July 30. Abdulmalik explicitly noted that “anxiety and anticipation” is part of the response. This is consistent with previous Iranian efforts to use the delay to generate psychological effects within Israel. Iranian armed forces-run outlet Defa Press claimed on August 11 that Iran is conducting a “flawless psychological war” against Israel by drawing out its retaliation.[11] Defa Press claimed that Iran’s psychological war on Israel has disrupted Israelis’ daily routines and stagnated the Israeli economy. This effort mirrors Iran’s attempt to exploit uncertainty surrounding its “imminent” attack in April 2024 to stoke terror in Israel, as CTP-ISW previously reported on April 11, 2024--two days before Iran attacked Israel in a major drone and missile attack on April 13.[12]

Egyptian officials cited by the Wall Street Journal on August 22 said that Egypt has refused any Israeli presence on the Philadelphi Corridor, which runs along the Egypt-Gaza Strip border.[13] The officials argued that Israel’s presence would violate the 1979 Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty and claimed that Egypt does not want to appear complicit in allowing Israeli forces to remain in the Gaza Strip. Israel has insisted that Israeli forces will remain on the Philadelphi Corridor to prevent Hamas’ weapons smuggling across the Egypt-Gaza Strip border. The United States proposed that the IDF control two observation towers instead of eight towers. Egyptian negotiators rejected the proposal. Unspecified current and former Israeli military officials speaking to the Wall Street Journal suggested that Israel could monitor the Philadelphi Corridor without a physical troop presence. The officials said that the IDF could use sensors to alert Israeli forces of possible tunnel building. Israeli forces would then conduct a targeted raid on the location in this scenario.[14] Maintaining Israeli control of the Philadelphi Corridor would help prevent Hamas and other Palestinian militias from rebuilding their capabilities quickly by interdicting major smuggling operations into the Gaza Strip that would accelerate Hamas’ ability to resupply itself, as CTP-ISW has argued previously.[15]

Houthi spokesperson Yahya Sarea claimed responsibility on August 22 for the August 21 attack targeting the Greek-flagged Sounion oil tanker and Panama-flagged SW North Wind I cargo ship in the Red Sea.[16] Houthi Supreme Leader Abdulmalik al Houthi claimed that a Houthi operation conducted in the past week damaged a ship, causing it to be ”swept away by the waves.”[17] The European Union’s military mission in the Red Sea, Operation Aspides, destroyed an unmanned surface vessel (USV) that posed an imminent threat to the Sounion while responding to the vessel’s call for help. Operation Aspides reported that its forces anchored the Sounion oil tanker and transported the crew to Djibouti.[18] Operation Aspides stated that the Sounion is still floating but it is carrying 150,000 metric tons of crude oil and could become a ”navigational and environmental hazard.”[19]

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation: Iranian interest in the progress of Gaza Strip ceasefire-hostage negotiations suggests that elements of the Iranian regime are likely delaying a retaliatory strike on Israel until ceasefire talks conclude. The Iranian security establishment may calculate that a continued delay will generate operational surprise while forgoing strategic surprise, though the continued Iranian delay has also enabled the United States to move more assets into the theater to defend against an attack.
• Axis of Resistance Information Efforts: Houthi supreme leader Abdulmalik al Houthi highlighted the psychological effects of delaying the retaliatory strike, which is consistent with Iranian efforts to use the delay to generate psychological effects.
• Philadelphi Corridor: Egyptian officials cited by the Wall Street Journal on August 22 said that Egypt has refused any Israeli presence on the Philadelphi Corridor, which runs along the Egypt-Gaza Strip border. The officials argued that Israel’s presence would violate the 1979 Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty and claimed that Egypt does not want to appear complicit in allowing Israeli forces to remain in the Gaza Strip.
• Red Sea: Houthi spokesperson Yahya Sarea claimed responsibility on August 22 for the August 21 attack targeting the Greek-flagged Sounion oil tanker and Panama-flagged SW North Wind I cargo ship in the Red Sea. The EU military mission in the Red Sea evacuated the Sounion’s crew and added that the Sounion is still floating but it is carrying 150,000 metric tons of crude oil and could become a ”navigational and environmental hazard.”

Iran Update, August 21, 2024

The Iranian Permanent Mission to the UN suggested on August 20 that Iran’s Axis of Resistance could conduct a ground attack into Israel in response to Israel killing several senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent weeks.[1] The Iranian UN mission likely published this statement to generate psychological and informational effects, rather than to signal Iran’s serious intention to conduct a ground attack into Israel imminently. The Iranian UN mission asserted that Iran could attack Israel “from the ground” while Israel is focused “on the skies and [its] radar screens.”[2] CTP-ISW has not previously observed Iranian officials threaten to conduct a ground incursion into Israel in response to Haniyeh’s death. Iran and its Axis of Resistance are unlikely seriously considering conducting a ground operation into Israel, however, given that such an operation would undermine their stated objective to avoid a large-scale war with Israel.

Iran and its Axis of Resistance are unlikely to risk triggering a large-scale war with Israel by conducting a ground operation into Israeli territory, and more likely seek to stoke fear and anxiety in Israeli society by presenting such an operation as a possible response to Haniyeh’s death. Israeli officials have repeatedly threatened military action to force the Radwan Force north of the Litani River if diplomatic efforts fail, and any ground attack into Israel is most likely to come from Lebanon.[3] Hezbollah’s Radwan Force, which is deployed in southern Lebanon, is designed for ground attacks to Israel. A ground attack from Lebanon would accelerate Israeli decision making and trigger a war to force the Radwan north of the Litani, at minimum. Senior IDF officials have explicitly stated that Israel will not allow Lebanese Hezbollah to conduct an October 7-style attack in northern Israel.[4] The IDF has also consistently targeted Radwan Force commanders in recent months.[5] The IDF’s targeting of Radwan Force commanders illustrates that the most likely ground attack threat to Israel comes from Hezbollah.

CTP-ISW is currently not prepared to change its assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack targeting Israel. Some recent Iranian statements and Western media reports diverge from CTP-ISW's ongoing assessment. Below are several of these statements and reports:

• Unspecified Iranian officials told Western media that Iran will "delay” its attack on Israel if Israel and Hamas conclude a ceasefire-hostage agreement.[6] The Iranian UN mission similarly claimed in its August 20 statement that Iran seeks to “avoid any possible adverse impact” on the ongoing ceasefire-hostage negotiations.[7]
• The Iranian president and his allies have advocated for attacking “secret Israeli bases” in Iraqi Kurdistan and Azerbaijan as a way to limit the risk of escalation.[8]
• Some senior Iranian officials have called for killing senior Israeli political and military leaders instead of conducting a widescale attack on Israel.[9]

CTP-ISW does not dismiss the above statements and reports. These statements and reports, however, most likely do not reflect the views of the Iranian security establishment and members of the chain of command who are ultimately responsible for deciding and implementing Iran’s response. The Iranian UN mission, for example, reports to the Iranian Foreign Affairs Ministry, which is part of the Masoud Pezeshkian administration. The Iranian UN mission’s statement that Iran seeks to avoid undermining ceasefire-hostage negotiations by conducting a strike therefore likely reflects Pezeshkian’s desire to avoid a direct strike on Israel rather than the views of the Iranian security establishment.[10] CTP-ISW continues to attach greater significance to statements from senior Iranian military officials and the Supreme Leader about how Iran will respond. These statements continue to indicate that Iran will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack targeting Israel:

• Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei ordered a direct strike on Israel during a Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) meeting immediately following Haniyeh’s death.[11] Khamenei has publicly stated that Israel should face a “harsh punishment” for killing Haniyeh.[12]
• Senior Iranian security officials, including Armed Forces General Staff Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri and SNSC Secretary Ali Akbar Ahmadian, have suggested that both Iran and the Axis of Resistance will retaliate against Israel.[13]
• Senior Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps officials, including IRGC Deputy Commander Ali Fadavi, continue to indicate that Iran will attack Israel directly.[14]

CTP-ISW will continue to closely monitor statements from senior Iranian security officials and will reevaluate its current assessment if these officials alter their rhetoric regarding Iran’s retaliation against Israel.

The Iranian Parliament approved all 19 of President Masoud Pezeshkian’s ministerial nominees on August 21.[15] This is the first time since 2001 and third time in the Islamic Republic’s history that all the President’s cabinet proposals got through the first round of voting in parliament. Parliament approved all of the ministerial nominees in the Khatami administration’s 2001 cabinet and the Rafsanjani administration’s 1989 cabinet.[16] Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had seen and approved Pezeshkian’s nominees before Pezeshkian presented it to Parliament, presumably as a way to increase the likelihood that Parliament would approve his nominees.[17] Pezeshkian’s deliberate choice to obtain Khamenei’s approval demonstrates his approach to cooperate with Khamenei.

Pezeshkian’s selection and Khamenei’s approval of this slate of ministers sought to establish a cabinet based on “unity” between political factions. This strategy probably also increased the likelihood Parliament would approve the nominees. President Masoud Pezeshkian emphasized that his ministerial nominees demonstrated that his administration would move forward with “unity” before Parliament voted on the ministers.[18] Pezeshkian also highlighted his proposed list’s diverse political factions, ranging from moderates and conservative and including officials with security backgrounds.[19]  Pezeshkian’s cabinet selections underline his intentions to appease political factions in Iran, reduce domestic political friction, and promote his agenda of national unity.

An unspecified Iranian official claimed that there is an ongoing “high-level debate” within Iran over the continued utility of the supreme leader’s 2003 fatwa against nuclear weapons. This debate is consistent with previous statements from Iranian officials that normalized discussions about Iran’s ability to procure nuclear weapons. Iranian officials continue to suggest Iran could change its nuclear strategy to address growing Israeli threats. An unspecified official told Al Jazeera that there is "high-level debate" over the continued utility of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's 2003 fatwa against the acquisition, development, and use of nuclear weapons.[20] The official said any shift in Iran's nuclear doctrine would be undertaken to address the threat Israel poses towards Iran.[21] The official noted, however, that a change in Iran's nuclear doctrine "does not necessarily mean moving towards nuclear weapons."[22]

Iranian officials have normalized discussions about Iran’s ability to procure nuclear weapons since April 2024 and there are some indications that Iran is setting conditions to be able to quickly move towards a weapon, should it choose to do so.[23] Axios, citing US and Israeli intelligence agencies, reported in June 2024 that Iran began running computer simulations that could support the research and development of a nuclear weapon.[24] Anonymous diplomats told Reuters on June 12 that Iran is installing new centrifuges at its nuclear facilities at Natanz and Fordow, increasing the Iranian capacity to enrich uranium.[25] The Iranian stockpile of 60-percent-enriched uranium separately increased by over 15 percent from February to May 2024, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.[26] These technical developments are especially noteworthy given that senior Iranian officials have indicated that Iran could change its nuclear doctrine in response to threats.[27] Some Iranian officials, including a top foreign policy adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, have threatened to pursue nuclear weapons development in recent months.[28]

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said that it has defeated Hamas’ Rafah Brigade. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said on August 21 during a visit to Rafah that the IDF 162nd Division has defeated Hamas’ Rafah Brigade and have uncovered over 150 tunnels between the Gaza Strip and Egypt.[29]  Gallant said that roughly one hundred of the tunnels are relatively low-tech and shallow.[30] The IDF 162nd Division advanced into Rafah on May 7, and the IDF said on June 17 that it had dismantled about half of Hamas’ forces in Rafah.[31] An Israeli Army Radio correspondent said in June 2024 that the IDF would shift to a “targeted raid” approach in the whole of the Gaza Strip after the end of the Rafah operation.[32] Hamas fighters have conducted 16 attacks targeting Israeli forces in Rafah over since August 10.[33] Other Palestinian militias conducted a combined 17 attacks over the same 11 days.[34] Smaller Palestinian militias allied with Hamas can continue to target Israeli forces along the Philadelphi Corridor, even if Hamas is ”defeated.”

Egyptian security sources told Reuters that Egypt would be open to an international presence along the Philadelphi Corridor for up to six months.[35] Egypt and Israel have not resolved their dispute over who will control the Rafah side of the Egypt-Gaza Strip border in the event of a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.  Israeli negotiators presented a map to Egyptian officials in recent days showing Israel reducing its forces but maintaining full control of the corridor, according to unspecified Israeli officials speaking to Axios.[36] Egyptian negotiators reportedly rejected the request to keep Israeli forces along the corridor.[37]  Maintaining Israeli control of the Philadelphi Corridor will prevent Hamas and other Palestinian militias from rebuilding their capabilities quickly by interdicting major smuggling operations into the Gaza Strip that would accelerate Hamas’ ability to resupply itself, as CTP-ISW has argued previously.[38]

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation: The Iranian Permanent Mission to the UN suggested on August 20 that Iran’s Axis of Resistance could conduct a ground attack into Israel in response to Israel killing several senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent weeks. The Iranian UN mission likely published this statement to generate psychological and informational effects, rather than to signal Iran’s serious intention to conduct a ground attack into Israel imminently. Iran and its Axis of Resistance are unlikely to risk triggering a large-scale war with Israel by conducting a ground operation into Israeli territory, and more likely seek to stoke fear and anxiety in Israeli society by presenting such an operation as a possible response to Haniyeh’s death.
• Risk of Major Iranian Drone and Missile Attack: CTP-ISW is currently not prepared to change its assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack targeting Israel. Some recent Iranian statements and Western media reports diverge from CTP-ISW's ongoing assessment. CTP-ISW does not dismiss the divergent statements and reports. These statements and reports, however, most likely do not reflect the views of the Iranian security establishment and members of the chain of command who are ultimately responsible for deciding and implementing Iran’s response.
• Iran’s Presidential Cabinet: The Iranian Parliament approved all 19 of President Masoud Pezeshkian’s ministerial nominees on August 21. Pezeshkian’s selection and Khamenei’s approval of this slate of ministers sought to establish a cabinet based on “unity” between political factions. This strategy probably also increased the likelihood Parliament would approve the nominees.
• Iranian Nuclear Program: An unspecified Iranian official claimed that there is an ongoing “high-level debate” within Iran over the continued utility of the supreme leader’s 2003 fatwa against nuclear weapons. This debate is consistent with previous statements from Iranian officials that normalized discussions about Iran’s ability to procure nuclear weapons. There are some indications that Iran is setting conditions to be able to quickly move towards a weapon, should it choose to do so.
• Rafah: The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said that it has defeated Hamas’ Rafah Brigade. Egyptian security sources told Reuters that Egypt would be open to an international presence along the Philadelphi Corridor for up to six months. Maintaining Israeli control of the Philadelphi Corridor will prevent Hamas and other Palestinian militias from rebuilding their capabilities quickly by interdicting major smuggling operations into the Gaza Strip that would accelerate Hamas’ ability to resupply itself.

Iran Update, August 20, 2024

Senior Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) officials have continued signaling that Iran will attack Israel directly in response to Israel killing several senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent weeks. IRGC Deputy Commander Brigadier General Ali Fadavi warned on August 20 that Iran will “definitely” retaliate against Israel “at the suitable time and place.”[1] Fadavi also warned that Israel “will be punished more severely than before,” likely referring to the large-scale Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel in April 2024.[2] CTP-ISW previously assessed that Iran likely seeks to cause greater damage to Israel than it did in its April 2024 attack in order to restore deterrence with Israel.[3] The United States, Israel, and their allies intercepted most of the projectiles that Iran and its allies fired at Israel in April 2024, so that the Iranian attack inflicted significantly less damage than Tehran intended.[4] IRGC spokesperson Brigadier General Ali Mohammad Naeini separately stated on August 20 that Iran is not rushing to retaliate against Israel.[5] Naeini, as the IRGC spokesperson, is the IRGC’s chief media officer and responsible for external messaging. Naeini claimed that Iran’s “right” to respond to Haniyeh’s death is unrelated to current ceasefire-hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas, which mirrors similar statements from senior Iranian political officials in recent days.[6] This statement notably differs from recent Western reports that Iran would refrain from attacking Israel if Israel reached a ceasefire-hostage agreement with Hamas.[7] The Western reports may reflect the views of more moderate factions, such as President Masoud Pezeshkian and his allies, within the regime, while the IRGC and Iranian security establishment more broadly still seemingly seeks to conduct a direct strike on Israel regardless of whether Israel and Hamas conclude a ceasefire-hostage agreement.[8] Naeini’s remark that Iran is not rushing its retaliation is consistent with CTP-ISW’s assessment that Iran is likely delaying its attack in part to stoke psychological terror among Israelis.[9]

Disagreements between Egypt and Israel over control of the Egypt-Gaza Strip border remain an obstacle to a ceasefire-hostage agreement. US, Egyptian, and Israeli negotiators in Cairo discussed control of the border area, known as the Philadelphi Corridor, on August 18 and 19.[10] Israeli negotiators presented a map at the talks showing Israel reducing its forces but maintaining full control of the corridor, according to unspecified Israeli officials speaking to Axios.[11] Controlling the Philadelphi Corridor will prevent Hamas and other Palestinian militias from rebuilding their capabilities quickly by interdicting smuggling into the Gaza Strip, as CTP-ISW has argued previously.[12] Axios reported that Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and the heads of the Israeli security services have concluded they can mitigate the risk of forces from the Philadelphi Corridor by building a monitoring mechanism over several months.[13] Arab media separately reported that Israel requested to introduce a written agreement that stipulates Israel’s "supervision” over the Palestinian side of the Philadelphi Corridor to the Camp David Accords peace deal with Egypt.[14] Egypt had previously threatened to suspend the Camp David Accords over an Israeli presence along the corridor.[15] Egypt denied the proposal that would permit a reduced Israeli force presence along the corridor and the request to formally alter the Camp David Accords terms.[16] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Israeli hostages’ families on August 20 that “under no circumstances” will Israeli forces leave the Philadelphi Corridor.[17] Hamas rejected the most recent US proposal for changing previously agreed upon terms, including allowing a reduced Israeli force presence along the Philadelphi Corridor.[18] Hamas has consistently demanded a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip under a ceasefire deal.[19]

Israeli forces recovered the bodies of six Israeli hostages in a tunnel in Khan Younis on August 20.[20] The IDF 35th Paratroopers Brigade, the 75th Armored Battalion (7th Brigade), Yahalom special operations engineers, and Shin Bet forces operated under the IDF 98th Division to retrieve the bodies.[21] The IDF stated that precise intelligence from Shin Bet enabled the operation.[22]  Israeli forces located a 10-meter-deep tunnel shaft that led to a tunnel system where Israeli forces located the hostages’ bodies.[23] The IDF added that Israeli forces searched nearby buildings and killed several Palestinian fighters in the area before the operation.[24] Palestinian fighters guarding the tunnel were killed or fled as Israeli forces approached the area.[25] An Israeli military correspondent reported that the operation was the “fastest" recovery operation conducted during the war.[26] The military correspondent reported that the Israeli forces had achieved “operational control” in a single day over one of the neighborhoods in which the hostages’ bodies were believed to be held.[27] The IDF did not specify in which neighborhood the recovery operation occurred. The IDF 35th Paratroopers Brigade expanded operations to western Khan Younis on August 18 and advanced into Hamad neighborhood—an area formerly designated as part of the al Mawasi humanitarian zone until the IDF declassified it on August 16.[28]

Several Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have threatened to resume attacks targeting US forces in order to expel the United States from the Middle East. These militias may be responding to the Iraqi Foreign Affairs Ministry stating on August 15 that it has postponed its announcement of the end of the US-led International Coalition’s mission to defeat ISIS.[29] Ashab al Kahf announced on August 19 that it changed its name to Kataib Sarkhat al Quds (meaning “Screams of al Quds Brigades”) and that the militia may resume attacking US forces around August 25.[30] The group added that its renaming is meant to reflect that its objectives are not limited to Iraq. A senior member of Harakat Hezbollah al Nujaba similarly told Emirati-owned media that Iraqi militias are resuming attacks targeting US forces due to US “procrastination and stalling” on withdrawing from Iraq.[31] An Iranian-backed militia leader likewise emphasized to Lebanese media the readiness of Iranian-backed Iraqi militias to attack US forces.[32] 

The militia leader, named Haydar al Moussawi, separately boasted that Iraqi militias have “new strategies” for attacking US forces due to military collaboration with the Houthis.[33] This statement reflects the growing military relationship across these parties, though Moussawi did not elaborate on these strategies. CTP-ISW has reported extensively on how the military relationship has deepened particularly in recent months.[34] A US self-defense strike in Iraq in July 2024 killed a senior Houthi officer and drone expert at an Iraqi militia stronghold.[35] The Houthi officer had traveled to Iraq to train Iranian-backed Iraqi militias on drone warfare. The Houthis and Iraqi militias have separately conducted several combined attacks on Israel throughout the Israel-Hamas war. [36]

IRGC Rear Admiral Ali Akbar Ahmadian will likely keep his current position as secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) under the Masoud Pezeshkian administration, according to United Kingdom-based Amwaj Media.[37] Ahmadian is a hardline IRGC officer with close connections across the IRGC leadership.[38] Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei advised President Pezeshkian to keep Ahmadian for at least one or two years, according to the Amwaj Media report.[39] The Iranian president is nominally responsible for appointing the SNSC secretary, although the appointment requires the backing of the supreme leader. Former President Ebrahim Raisi appointed Ahmadian as SNSC secretary in May 2023.[40] Ahmadian replaced IRGC Rear Admiral Ali Shamkhani, who had held the position from 2013 to 2021.[41] Ahmadian was Shamkhani's deputy, when the latter was IRGC Navy commander from 1988 to 1997.[42]

Amwaj Media also reported that Pezeshkian had considered four other candidates to be SNSC secretary before Khamenei advised him to keep Ahmadian. The four candidates were reformist former IRGC Navy officer Hossein Alaei, Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations Saeed Iravani, former presidential candidate and justice minister Mostafa Pour Mohammadi, and former SNSC secretary and former parliament speaker Ali Larijani.[43] All the candidates have connections to varying degrees to the moderate-reformist bloc. Alaei, for instance, implicitly criticized Khamenei for his handling of the Green Movement in 2009.[44] Alaei’s criticism prompted senior IRGC officials to condemn Alaei and pressure him into issuing a public apology.[45] Pezeshkian had no obvious reason to expect Khamenei to approve these candidates, especially Alaei, suggesting that Pezeshkian considering such figures was meant to appeal to the moderate-reformist bloc and frame Pezeshkian as advocating for its platform.

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian attack on Israel: Senior Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) officials have continued signaling that Iran will attack Israel directly in response to Israel killing several senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent weeks.
• Israel-Hamas ceasefire-hostage negotiations: Disagreements between Egypt and Israel over control of the Egypt-Gaza Strip border remain an obstacle to a ceasefire-hostage agreement.
• Iraq: Several Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have threatened to resume attacks targeting US forces in order to expel the United States from the Middle East.
• Iran: IRGC Rear Admiral Ali Akbar Ahmadian will likely keep his current position as secretary of the Iranian SNSC under the Masoud Pezeshkian administration, according to United Kingdom-based Amwaj Media.

Iran Update, August 19, 2024

The United States, Israel, and international mediators plan to continue ceasefire talks despite Hamas’ rejection of the latest ceasefire-hostage proposal. US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli President Isaac Herzog, and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on August 19 to discuss the ceasefire-hostage deal and the prevention of a regional war.[i] Blinken told reporters before meeting with Israeli President Isaac Herzog that the current ceasefire-hostage talks could be the last chance to achieve a ceasefire.[ii] An Israeli official told The Times of Israel that Netanyahu said during the meeting that he will send his top negotiators to this week’s ceasefire summit in Cairo.[iii] An anonymous US official said that the Biden administration still expects a resumption of talks from the key negotiating partners later this week.[iv] Hamas, however, rejected the ceasefire-hostage proposal produced in the most recent round of talks in Doha and continues to support the July 2024 ceasefire-hostage proposal.[v] Several senior Hamas officials similarly indicated to international media that there are significant obstacles in the ceasefire-hostage negotiations, despite US optimism about the chances of striking a deal.[vi]

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation and Ceasefire Negotiations: The United States, Israel, and international mediators plan to continue ceasefire talks despite Hamas’ rejection of the latest ceasefire-hostage proposal. Iranian officials suggested that Iran will delay its retaliation against Israel for the death of former Hamas head Ismail Haniyeh until after ceasefire negotiations conclude.
• Gaza Strip: An unspecified source “familiar with the [ceasefire] talks” told a Lebanese news outlet that Egypt agreed not to set a timeline for an Israeli withdrawal from the Philadelphi Corridor during talks in Cairo. Control over the Philadelphi Corridor by the IDF or another entity capable of preventing smuggling and the operation of tunnels will prevent Hamas and other Palestinian militias from rebuilding their capabilities quickly. Controlling the corridor would very likely make it extremely difficult for Hamas to reconstitute itself to the levels it had achieved prior to October 7 in any short period of time.
• Terror Attack in Tel Aviv: Hamas claimed its first suicide attack in Israel since 2008. Hamas threatened further suicide attacks, which may indicate a shift in tactics as IDF operations destroy Hamas rocket supplies and limit Hamas’ ability to conduct rocket attacks.
• Iranian Presidential Cabinet Formation: Iranian ministerial nominees outlined their agendas to Parliament on August 18 and 19. The nominees’ proposed policies are largely consistent with current regime policies.

Iran Update, August 18, 2024

Hamas rejected the latest US-mediated ceasefire-hostage proposal negotiated last week with Egypt, Israel, and Qatar.[1] An anonymous Hamas official told Saudi-owned Asharq News on August 18 that the US-mediated proposal “completely contradicts” Hamas’ previous demands.[2] The proposal included the following stipulations, according to the Hamas official, although CTP-ISW cannot verify the official’s claim.

• The IDF would reduce its force presence along the Philadelphi Corridor but not withdraw completely.
• The Palestinian Authority (PA) would manage the Rafah border crossing under “Israeli supervision.”
• Israel would monitor the displaced Gazans returning to the northern Gaza Strip and crossing the Netzarim Corridor.
• Israel would release a “large” number of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Hamas releasing Israeli hostages.
• Israel would retain the right to veto the release of at least 100 Palestinian prisoners that Hamas demands.

Hamas in a statement on August 18 formerly rejected the proposal and accused Israel of setting “new conditions and demands” that obstructed the negotiations. Hamas criticized the lack of a provision for a permanent ceasefire in the latest proposal. Hamas rejected the possibility that the IDF would remain in the Gaza Strip, particularly around the Netzarim and Philadelphi corridors. Hamas also rejected the latest proposal for exchanging Israeli hostages with Palestinian prisoners. Hamas lastly reiterated its support for the ceasefire-hostage proposal that it submitted in July 2024. The contents of that proposal are not publicly available.[3]

Several senior Hamas officials similarly indicated to international media that there remain significant obstacles in the ceasefire-hostage negotiations, despite US optimism about the chances of striking a deal.[4] Hamas Political Bureau member and spokesperson Osama Hamdan claimed to al Jazeera on August 18 that Israel introduced “new ideas” in the most recent negotiations.[5] Hamdan criticized Israel for a permanent ceasefire and to withdraw its forces from the Gaza Strip. Hamdan also claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not serious about negotiations and called him the main obstacle to a ceasefire. Hamdan was in Doha, where the negotiations occurred, when making these remarks, indicating that he was involved in the negotiations alongside other senior Hamas officials.[6] Hamdan has previously served in senior roles in Hamas, representing the organization in Iran and Lebanon.[7] Hamas Political Bureau member Sami Abu Zuhri separately stated on August 17 that reports of progress towards a ceasefire-hostage deal are an ”illusion.”[8]

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in Israel on August 18 to continue efforts to bridge gaps between Israel and Hamas regarding the US-mediated ceasefire-hostage proposal.[9] The US State Department stated that Blinken will emphasize to the involved parties to “avoid escalation or any other actions that could undermine the ability to finalize an agreement.”[10] A senior State Department official stated, prior to the Hamas rejection, that there is a ”strong belief” within the Joe Biden administration that any remaining gaps between Israel and Hamas are ”bridgeable.”[11] Blinken will meet with Netanyahu on August 19.[12]

Iran has engaged with international mediators throughout this latest of ceasefire-hostage negotiations. Acting Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Bagheri Kani held two phone calls with Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al Thani on August 15 and 16.[13] An unspecified US official told Axios that Iran claimed that it wanted a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and to deescalate regional tensions.[14] Bagheri Kani separately held a phone call with Egyptian Foreign Affairs Minister Badr Abdelatty on August 17.[15] Bagheri Kani reiterated that Iran has the ”inherent and legitimate right” to retaliate for the Israeli killing of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31.

Iran Update, August 17, 2024

Hamas has rejected optimism from US and international mediators that a ceasefire-hostage agreement is close to being reached.[i] Hamas stated that there has been no progress on ceasefire-hostage talks and accused the United States of selling a “false positive atmosphere.”[ii] Hamas restated its demand on August 16 that negotiations return to the Hamas’ July 2024 proposal after talks in Doha concluded. Hamas listed its demands for a full Israel Defense Forces (IDF) withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, a “real [hostage-prisoner exchange] deal,” and humanitarian aid for the Gaza Strip. Unspecified sources “familiar with the matter” claimed that Hamas suggested that it is willing to speak with mediators if “significant progress” was made during the talks in Doha on August 15 and 16.[iii] It is unclear whether the ceasefire talks met this threshold. Israeli mediators are ”cautiously optimistic” that ceasefire negotiations will advance.[iv] Israel, however, insists that Israeli forces retain control over the Philadelphi Corrido, which is incompatible withHamas’ demand for a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.[v] Lower-level talks will continue into next week to resolve outstanding demands between Israel and Hamas ahead of a second round of talks in Cairo, Egypt.[vi]

The United States and foreign mediators are maintaining pressure on Iran to delay an attack targeting Israel by threatening Iran and highlighting reported ceasefire progress. Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al Thani highlighted progress in ceasefire-hostage negotiations during phone calls with acting Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Bagheri Kani following talks in Doha on August 15 and 16.[vii] Al Thani warned Bagheri Kani of unspecified consequences if Iran attacked Israel during negotiations in retaliation for Israel killing Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. An unspecified US official speaking to reporters stated that Iran could face ”cataclysmic” consequences if it derailed negotiations by conducting a retaliatory strike on Israel.[viii] US, Israeli, and Iranian officials cited by the New York Times on August 16 said that Iran is expected to delay its retaliatory strike during ceasefire negotiations.[ix] US President Joe Biden reportedly views the deal as the “key. . . to preventing a regional war,” and he said that he “expects” that Iranian leaders will delay or indefinitely postpone a strike if a ceasefire agreement is reached.[x] It remains unclear if “hold off” means that Iranian leaders would decline to mount any retaliatory strike on Israel or just that Iran would delay its strike.

Key Takeaways:

• Gaza Ceasefire-Hostage Negotiations: Hamas has rejected optimism from US and international mediators that a ceasefire-hostage agreement is close to being reached.
• Iranian Retaliation: The United States and foreign mediators are maintaining pressure on Iran to delay an attack targeting Israel by threatening Iran and highlighting reported ceasefire progress.
• Gaza: The IDF 98th Division expanded its clearing operation in Khan Younis on August 17. Israeli forces located and destroyed Hamas infrastructure and engaged Palestinian fighters.
• Lebanon: Hezbollah launched at least 55 rockets into northern Israel on August 17 in retaliation for an IDF strike in Nabatieh that killed 10 civilians.
• West Bank: Israeli forces engaged Palestinian fighters in at least two locations in the West Bank since CTP-ISW's last data cutoff on August 16.
• Yemen: US Central Command (CENTCOM) destroyed a Houthi naval attack drone in the Red Sea on August 16.

Iran Update, August 16, 2024

• Iranian Retaliation: The United States and foreign mediators seem to be attempting to delay or indefinitely postpone an Iranian and Hezbollah attack targeting Israel by both threatening Iran and presenting a potential ceasefire-hostage agreement as an off-ramp from further regional escalation. There are some indications that Iran will wait until the current ceasefire negotiations conclude to conduct an attack on Israel.
• Hostage-ceasefire negotiations: US and international mediators are expressing optimism about ceasefire and hostage talks that Hamas did not officially participate in. Israeli and Arab reports suggest that the talks have not resolved the two largest residual issues which both concern Israel’s presence in the Gaza Strip during a ceasefire.
• Lebanon: Lebanese Hezbollah published a video on August 16 showing a network of its tunnels in Lebanon. The video further publicizes the development of Hezbollah’s capabilities, likely in part to deter Israel from launching a major offensive against the group.
• West Bank: Dozens of armed Israeli settlers stormed a village near Nablus in the West Bank on August 15. At least 70 settlers set fire to vehicles and homes and threw firebombs and rocks in Jit, west of Nablus, according to Western media.
• Iran-China Relations: Iran is reportedly seeking security partnerships with two Chinese satellite companies specializing in low-cost satellites capable of capturing high-resolution imagery. This capability could enable Iran to enhance its intelligence gathering capabilities to improve the effectiveness of its strikes.
• Iraq: University of Tehran President Mohammad Moghimi announced on August 15 that the University of Tehran will accept members of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) without university entrance exams.

Iran Update, August 15, 2024

Iran is likely trying to build operational surprise ahead of its expected attack on Israel. Iranian officials and state media have suggested repeatedly in recent weeks that an attack is imminent.[1] They have likewise suggested that they are imminently delaying the attack to create uncertainty about the timing of the attack and thus stoke anxiety and fear among Israelis.[2] An IRGC-affiliated outlet published a graphic on August 15, for instance, boasting that the ambiguity surrounding the timing of the attack is just as harmful as the strike itself will be.[3] Iran has tried to build this operational surprise while forgoing having any strategic surprise. Iranian officials have been clear in their plans to attack likely in order to reduce the risk of miscalculation, keep the escalation relatively contained, and to avoid an all-out war.

The operational surprise that Iran is trying to build is meant to increase the likelihood that an Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel would inflict serious damage. John Kirby—the US White House National Security communications advisor—warned on August 15 that Iran could launch a strike with “little or no warning.”[4] US officials speaking to Western media have indicated that there is no consensus about when exactly an Iranian attack will occur.[5] Iran likely seeks to exploit this lack of warning to help its drones and missiles penetrate Israeli air defenses and strike some of their intended targets within Israel. Iran has taken similar approaches in previous attacks, such as the large-scale Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel in April 2024 and the Iranian missile attack on US forces in Iraq in January 2020.[6] Iran in both instances had forgone strategic surprise but cultivated operational surprise by threatening to attack and sending conflicting messages and statements about when exactly it would occur.

CTP-ISW continues to assess that the most likely course of action is that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will conduct a coordinated drone and missile attack on Israel. Senior Iranian officials have been consistent in their statements saying that they will respond “forcefully” to Israel killing Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran.[7] Western intelligence services have moreover observed Iranian preparations for an attack.[8]

CTP-ISW continues to evaluate the likelihood of other courses of action in which Iran does not launch a major, coordinated strike on Israel. Three anonymous Iranian officials speaking to Reuters on August 13 claimed that Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah would refrain from attacking Israel if it reached a ceasefire-hostage agreement with Hamas.[9] US President Joe Biden similarly said that he “expects” that a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip achieved in the next few days would lead Iran to refrain from attacking.[10] CTP-ISW assesses that this course of action is unlikely at the moment in part because the Iranian regime has not suggested this possibility publicly and has instead maintained that it will attack. Hamas also refused to participate in the latest round of negotiations in Qatar on August 15, making this course of action even less likely.

The US, Egyptian, Israeli, and Qatari officials met in Doha for the latest round of ceasefire-hostage negotiations on August 15.[11] President Biden, Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad al Thani, and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al Sisi called on both Israel and Hamas on August 8 to resume “urgent discussion” to close remaining gaps in an agreement based on the US-backed, UN Security Council-endorsed proposal.[12] Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar expanded Hamas’ negotiating demands leading up to the talks by insisting that Israel accept an earlier Hamas-proposed ceasefire from July 2024.[13] Hamas refused to attend ceasefire talks in Doha on August 15 on the grounds that Israel is ”deceiving and evading. . . to prolong the war and even expand it at a regional level. ”[14] An unspecified source ”with knowledge of the issue” cited by Axios claimed that Hamas officials were present in Doha during the negotiations to participate in indirect talks.[15]

Hamas met with three other Palestinian militias in the Gaza Strip on August 14 to discuss ceasefire-hostage negotiation and post-war governance.[16] These militias included the Palestinian Mujahideen Movement, the Popular Resistance Committees, and the Palestinian Freedom Movement. The four Palestinian militias emphasized their unanimous support for Hamas’ public August 11 demand that international mediators “oblige” Israel to work to implement a previous ceasefire proposal that Hamas submitted in July 2024 instead of conducting further negotiations.[17] The statement reiterated the groups’ support for the July 2024 proposal, which they claimed would implement a ceasefire, a complete Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, the entry of humanitarian aid, the reconstruction of the strip, and a “serious deal” to exchange Palestinian prisoners for Israeli hostages.[18] The statement added that the “so-called day after the war” is a Palestinian national affair to be only decided by Palestinians.[19] The statement denounced US, Israeli, and other international attempts to create alternative governance plans for the Gaza Strip.[20] The groups may be referencing recent attempts by US, Israeli, and Arab nations to advance plans that would reportedly install vetted Palestinian or multinational forces to temporarily provide security and stability in the Gaza Strip.[21] The statement also called for reforming the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization to include “all national components,” likely referring to Hamas‘ intent to maintain influence over the Palestinian unity government formed with Fatah in July 2024.[22]

It is notable that the Hamas meeting in the Gaza Strip did not include several prominent Palestinian militias. Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) were not present at the meeting nor included in the joint statement. These Palestinian militias have actively supported Hamas operations in the Gaza Strip since October 2023.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced on August 15 the death of an IRGC Aerospace Force colonel from injuries sustained in an airstrike in Syria.[23] IRGC Commander Major Hossein Salami stated that the colonel, Ahmad Reza Afshari, was transferred to Iran between July 22 and August 5 for medical treatment before he died.[24] Iranian state media reported that the US-led International Coalition was responsible for the airstrike that ultimately killed Afshari but did not provide further details.[25]

The killing of Ashari reflects the increasingly prominent role that the IRGC Aerospace Force has adopted in Iranian extraterritorial operations in recent years.[26] The IRGC Aerospace Force is the principal operator of the Iranian drone and missile arsenal and has had traditionally little involvement in operations alongside the Axis of Resistance. But the IRGC Aerospace Force has adopted some responsibility—in cooperation with the IRGC Quds Force—for transferring drones and missiles to and through Syria.[27] This expanding role of the IRGC Aerospace Force appears to have accelerated since the United States killed Qassem Soleimani in 2020.[28]

Key Takeaways:

• Iran: Iran is likely trying to build operational surprise ahead of its expected attack on Israel. CTP-ISW continues to assess that the most likely course of action is that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will conduct a coordinated drone and missile attack on Israel.
• Hostage-ceasefire negotiations: The US, Egyptian, Israeli, and Qatari officials met in Doha for the latest round of ceasefire-hostage negotiations. Hamas refused to attend but sent officials to engage in indirect talks.
• Gaza Strip: Hamas met with three other Palestinian militias in the Gaza Strip to discuss ceasefire-hostage negotiation and post-war governance. It is notable that the Hamas meeting in the Gaza Strip did not include several prominent Palestinian militias.
• Syria: The IRGC announced the death of an IRGC Aerospace Force colonel from injuries sustained in an airstrike in Syria. The death reflects the increasingly prominent role that the IRGC Aerospace Force has adopted in Iranian extraterritorial operations in recent years.

Iran Update, August 14, 2024

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei indicated that he still believes Iran must respond to Israeli operations targeting senior Axis of Resistance leaders in recent weeks, despite back-channel threats from the United States emphasizing that Israel would respond forcefully to an attack that kills Israeli civilians or causes significant damage..[i] Khamenei said on August 14 at a meeting with the National Congress of Martyrs of Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad Province that “according to [his interpretation of] the Quran” any non-tactical retreat, whether in military, political or economic affairs, leads to the wrath of God.[ii] Khamenei also said that the United States and Israel are waging ”psychological warfare” by exaggerating their ability to harm Iran in response to an Iranian strike.[iii] This argument suggests that US and Israeli attempts to discourage a direct strike on Israel have failed to convince the supreme leader and his inner circle. Back-channel messages from the United States have emphasized to both Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah that Israel would respond forcefully to an attack that kills Israeli civilians or causes significant damage.[iv]

These most recent statements are consistent with Khamenei’s belief that Iran has a ”duty” to respond to Israel’s targeted killing of Haniyeh on July 31.[v] Khamenei will have the final say on how and when Iran's retaliatory attack on Israel is conducted, and his repeated comments highlighting the necessity of a retaliation suggests that the Iranian regime will likely mount a retaliatory strike on Israel.[vi] Khamenei’s statements do not, however, indicate his chosen form of response and so his statements do not independently verify CTP-ISW’s running assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel.

Official Hamas statements suggest that a ceasefire during the August 15 Doha talks is unlikely.[vii] Unspecified Hamas officials have suggested that Hamas could attend the talks, however.[viii] The United States, Qatar, and Egypt said on August 8 that they would present a “final bridging proposal” at these talks that resolves outstanding points of disagreement in a manner that can ideally meet both Israeli and Hamas expectations.[ix] The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office confirmed on August 14 that Israel would send a high-level delegation with a mandate to negotiate to Doha.[x]

At least five named Hamas officials and an unknown number of unnamed Hamas sources spoke to Western media outlets about these talks on August 13 and 14.[xi] The named Hamas officials have maintained consistently that Hamas will not attend ceasefire talks, claiming that talks allow Israel to introduce new conditions and to use the talks as “cover to continue aggression” against the Palestinian people.[xii] These statements are consistent with Hamas’ public August 11 demand that international mediators “oblige” Israel to accept “a plan to implement” a previous ceasefire proposal that Hamas submitted in July 2024 instead of conducting further negotiations.[xiii] Unspecified Hamas statements given to international media have claimed there is a chance Hamas will attend the August 15 talks, however.[xiv] An unnamed Hamas source told CNN that the group had adopted a strategy of “intentional ambiguity” over its participation in ceasefire and hostage talks.[xv] Two unspecified officials referencing knowledge of Hamas thinking said that Hamas would consider a “serious response” put forth by Israel that responds to Hamas’ July 2 proposal.[xvi] Israel responded to Hamas’ July 2 proposal on July 27 and issued ”essential clarifications” to past clauses and did not introduce new clauses, according to Israel.[xvii] Israel said those ”clarifications” included how to assure that only unarmed Palestinians cross into the northern Gaza Strip and the number of living hostages to be released.[xviii] Hamas official Osama Hamdan claims that Hamas never received the document.[xix]

US President Biden “expect[s]” that a successful ceasefire in the Gaza Strip achieved in the next few days would make Iranian leaders hold off on a retaliatory strike targeting Israel.[xx] It remains unclear if ”hold off” means Iranian leaders would decline to mount any retaliatory strike on Israel, or just that Iran would delay its strike. Reuters first reported the suggestion that Iran would ”hold back” from a strike on August 13, citing three unspecified senior Iranian officials.[xxi] CTP-ISW assesses that Iran is likely trying to expand divisions within Israel and between Israel and the United States ahead of a possible Iranian drone and missile attack by circulating this rumor.[xxii] Iran likely calculates that conditioning its attack on Israel on whether Israel and Hamas reach a ceasefire-hostage deal could force Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to choose between two bad options that could either cause him to lose the support of his political coalition or be blamed by Israeli society and allies for the ensuing Iranian-led attack on Israel.

The Iranian Parliament will vote to approve four ministerial nominees during the week of August 18 who articulated policies largely consistent with the regime’s current foreign policy.[xxiii] The Iranian Parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Commission approved the qualifications and plans of four cabinet minister nominees on August 14.[xxiv] The nominees for Foreign Minister, Intelligence Minister, Defense Minister and Interior Minister presented proposals for their ministries to the Iranian Parliament between August 12-14. The proposals are largely consistent with current regime foreign policy, though the nominee for foreign affairs minister continued to signal the Pezeshkian Administration’s willingness to pursue nuclear negotiations. The nominee for intelligence minister—who also served under former President Ebrahim Raisi—emphasized confronting Israel. Both the nominated foreign affairs minister and defense minister emphasized the importance of supporting Iran’s Axis of Resistance. The full proposals are as follows:

• Abbas Araghchi (Foreign Minister): Araghchi emphasized the need to both neutralize the effect of western sanctions on Iran and pursue the removal of sanctions entirely “with honorable means.”[xxv] Neutralizing sanctions suggests that Iran will attempt to reduce its economic dependency on other, pro-West states, while removing sanctions is a reference to pursuing negotiations. Pezeshkian’s appointment of Araghchi signals his serious intent to pursue nuclear negotiations with the West, given that Aragchi previously played a prominent role in nuclear negotiations with the West under former President Hassan Rouhani.[xxvi] Araghchi also said that he is committed to “all-around support” for the Axis of Resistance.[xxvii] Araghchi added that he will continue the “neighborhood policy” of former President Ebrahim Raisi by pursuing relations with other regional countries. Araghchi noted that he intends to increase Iranian exports through active economic diplomacy.
• Esmail Khatib (Intelligence Minister): Khatib stated that his top priority as Intelligence Minister would be to “confront” Israel.[xxviii] Khatib further stated that Iran must confront Israel in the “field of influence” by producing informational content. Khatib stated his other priorities included fighting terrorist groups such as the Islamic State Khorasan Province. Khatib stated that Iranian cooperation with Iraq has increased the security of northwestern Iran. Khatib claimed that 53 foreign intelligence services are ”structurally” working against Iran. Khatib also served in former President Ebrahim Raisi’s administration.
• Brigadier General Aziz Nasir Zadeh (Defense Minister): Nasir Zadeh proposed improving Iran’s airpower should he be approved as Defense Minister.[xxix] Nasir Zadeh proposed constructing vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft and airborne early warning and control aircraft. Nasir Zadeh stated that the Defense Ministry must continue to provide “effective and stable” support for the Axis of Resistance in all cultural, political, and economic fields. Nasir Zadeh also emphasized increased defense diplomacy to increase defense exports to neighboring countries and countries in Latin America and Africa.
• Eskander Momeni (Interior Minister): Momeni identified strengthening social and cultural capital, managing natural crises and environmental challenges, and increasing the political participation of citizens as the most important programs of the Interior Ministry.[xxx]  Momeni proposed promoting social capital by promoting public satisfaction and trust with the regime. Momeni is likely referring to promoting positive relations between the people and the regime to increase public participation in politics when he discusses social capital. Momeni stated that the government could prevent the feeling of social isolation by improving interaction between the government and the people.

Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said on August 12 that Iran is cooperating with Hamas in Lebanon to smuggle weapons and funds into Jordan to destabilize the Jordanian government.[xxxi] Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi denied Katz’s statement.[xxxii] CTP-ISW has observed previous Iranian attempts to undermine security in Jordan.[xxxiii] Jordanian police located two separate caches of explosives in Amman in June 2024 and linked these incidents to Iranian efforts to recruit agents in Jordan to destabilize the country.[xxxiv] Iranian-backed groups in Iraq have also shown an interest in developing networks in Jordan, including by threatening to equip thousands of “Islamic Resistance in Jordan” fighters with weapons in April 2024.[xxxv] A destabilized Jordan could provide Iran with more opportunities to transport weapons to Palestinian fighters in the West Bank.

Iran’s smuggling attempts through Jordan are part of a likely Iranian effort to increase its influence in the West Bank. Katz said that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is working with Hamas to transport weapons and funds through Jordan to Palestinian fighters in the West Bank.[xxxvi] Jordan's western border with the West Bank offers multiple routes through which Iran can move weapons into the West Bank.

Katz also said that Iran effectively controls Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank and that the Palestinian Authority is “powerless to act.”[xxxvii] Katz highlighted the Jenin refugee camp as a hub of Palestinian militia activity and said that Israel must take action to dismantle militia networks in the camp. Katz‘s comments come amid an uptick in Palestinian militia attacks in Jenin in August.

Unspecified Iranian backed militia launched unspecified projectiles targeting US forces at Conoco Mission Support Site in Deir ez Zor Province on August 13.[xxxviii] The projectiles landed near the base and no damage or injuries were reported, according to two unnamed US officials cited by Reuters.[xxxix] Local Syrian sources reported that US aircraft launched three retaliatory airstrikes targeting the rocket launch sites in al Hussainiya and al Junaina in Deir ez Zor Province.[xl] Local sources did not report any casualties.  US official sources have not confirmed the attack on Conoco Mission Support Site or US retaliatory strikes in Deir ez Zor.

Israeli media reported that the IDF has deployed Israeli security forces along the northern border to protect against October 7-like attacks from Lebanon.[xli] Israeli newspaper Maariv reported on August 13 that the IDF bolstered security forces’ preparedness amid fears of a potential Hezbollah ground attack into northern Israel.[xlii] The IDF deployed security forces to unspecified northern Israeli towns on an unspecified date to form an “intervention force” to respond quickly to October 7-like infiltration threats.[xliii] Maariv reported that the IDF pre-positioned this force in northern Israel after learning lessons from October 7. Israeli security forces reportedly began training local police to respond to infiltration-type attacks following October 7.[xliv] Israeli media did not say whether the deployment of security forces along the northern border was triggered by a specific threat.

Surprise ground attacks are becoming a central idea in Iranian planning to destroy the Israeli state. Hezbollah pioneered the idea of ground attacks into Israel, and it developed the Radwan Force to this end.[xlv] The IDF discovered one Hezbollah plan developed in the early 2010s that involved a major assault by the Radwan Force in which the unit would infiltrate northern Israeli towns, strong point them, and then use Israeli citizens as hostages and human shields to protect against the IDF’s response.[xlvi] Senior Iranian leaders publicly expressed interest in involving Lebanese Hezbollah and Iranian-backed Palestinian militias to launch ground campaigns from multiple fronts to destabilize the Israeli political and social order.[xlvii] A senior Iranian leader argued in May 2024 that the Axis of Resistance could destroy Israel by launching surprise attacks from Lebanon, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank simultaneously, for instance.[xlviii]

The IDF has previously conducted operations to protect against this threat, and the more recent deployments are drawing on the lessons the IDF learned on October 7 to better protect northern Israelis. The IDF launched an operation in 2018 to identify and destroy cross-border tunnels that would enable such infiltrations.[xlix] The mayor of the northern Israeli town Shlomi told Maariv that locals remain concerned about the existence of Hezbollah tunnels leading into northern Israel, however.[l]

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation: Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei indicated that he still believes Iran must respond to Israeli operations targeting senior Axis of Resistance leaders in recent weeks, despite back-channel threats from the United States emphasizing that Israel would respond forcefully to an attack that kills Israeli civilians or causes significant damage.
• Gaza Ceasefire Talks: Official Hamas statements suggest that a ceasefire during the August 15 Doha talks is unlikely. Unspecified Hamas officials have suggested that Hamas could attend the talks, however. US President Biden “expect[s]” that a successful ceasefire in the Gaza Strip achieved in the next few days would make Iranian leaders hold off on a retaliatory strike targeting Israel. CTP-ISW assesses that Iran is likely trying to expand divisions within Israel and between Israel and the United States ahead of a possible Iranian drone and missile attack by circulating a rumor that it would ”hold back” if there is a Gaza ceasefire.
• Iranian Cabinet Formation: The Iranian Parliament will vote to approve four ministerial nominees during the week of August 18 who articulated policies largely consistent with the regime’s current foreign policy. The Iranian Parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Commission approved the qualifications and plans of four cabinet minister nominees on August 14.
• West Bank: Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said on August 12 that Iran is cooperating with Hamas in Lebanon to smuggle weapons and funds into Jordan to destabilize the Jordanian government. Iran’s smuggling attempts through Jordan are part of a likely Iranian effort to increase its influence in the West Bank.
• Iraq and Syria: Unspecified Iranian backed militia launched unspecified projectiles targeting US forces at Conoco Mission Support Site in Deir ez Zor Province on August 13. The projectiles landed near the base and no damage or injuries were reported, according to two unnamed US officials cited by Reuters.
• Lebanon: Israeli media reported that the IDF has deployed Israeli security forces along the northern border to protect against October 7-like attacks from Lebanon. Maariv reported that the IDF pre-positioned this force in northern Israel after learning lessons from October 7.

Iran Update, August 13, 2024

Iran is likely trying to expand divisions within Israel and between Israel and the United States ahead of a possible Iranian drone and missile attack. Three anonymous senior Iranian officials speaking to Reuters on August 13 claimed that Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah would refrain from attacking Israel if it reached a ceasefire-hostage agreement with Hamas.[1] One of the senior Iranian officials claimed that Iran and Hezbollah would attack Israel if ceasefire-hostage talks fail or if Israel delays negotiations.

These comments from senior Iranian officials come as Hamas has expanded its negotiating demands, making an agreement harder to reach. Hamas has refused to participate in the next round of negotiations scheduled for August 15 on the grounds that Israel is “deceiving and evading. . . to prolong the war and even expand it at the regional level.”[2] Hamas asked international mediators on August 11 to “ oblige” Israel to accept “a plan to implement” a previous ceasefire proposal that Hamas submitted in July 2024—instead of conducting further negotiations.[3] This Hamas ceasefire proposal reportedly compromised on one of Hamas’ maximalist demands by allowing a partial IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip during the first phase of a three-phase ceasefire agreement. Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar separately told Arab mediators on August 12 that Israel must stop military operations in the Gaza Strip if “[Israel] wants Hamas to participate” in further negotiations.[4] Sinwar has effectively required Israel to commit to a unilateral ceasefire before Hamas will engage in actual ceasefire discussions.

Iran likely calculates that conditioning its attack on Israel on whether Israel and Hamas reach a ceasefire-hostage deal forces Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to choose between two bad options. Iran could calculate that, if Netanyahu accepts the ceasefire proposal, then he could lose the support of his political coalition. Israeli Foreign Affairs Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Ben Gvir have previously threatened to leave Netanyahu’s coalition if a ceasefire is reached before Hamas is destroyed.[5] Iran may also calculate that, if Netanyahu were to reject Hamas’ proposal, then Netanyahu would be blamed by Israeli society and allies for the ensuing Iranian-led attack on Israel. Either course of action would serve the Iranian objectives of expanding divisions within Israel and isolating Israel from its allies, particularly the United States. Iran may miscalculate the likely responses in Israel and the United States to a successful Iranian strike that causes significant damage or loss of life.

The anonymous Iranian officials who spoke to Reuters likely meant to achieve the informational effect described above rather than to provide accurate information about the circumstances in which Iran would attack Israel. Senior Iranian officials and Iranian armed forces leaders speaking by name on the record have continued to indicate that they will attack Israel regardless of whether a ceasefire is reached in the Gaza Strip. That the Iranian regime is not suggesting the possibility of refraining from a strike in return for a ceasefire in its own domestic information space reinforces CTP-ISW's assessment that the Iranian officials spoke to Reuters to generate informational effects in the West. It is unclear, moreover, whether the Iranian officials speaking to Reuters have any role in the Iranian military chain of command. The Iranian president and his government, for context, has no control over the Iranian armed forces.

The United States has deployed the USS Laboon guided-missile destroyer to the eastern Mediterranean Sea, according to an anonymous US defense official.[6] The official said that the USS Laboon arrived in the eastern Mediterranean from the Red Sea as part of US force posture changes ahead of Iran’s and Iranian-backed groups’ expected attack on Israel. The US Department of Defense previously announced on August 2 that it would deploy air- and sea-based cruise missile defenses, ballistic missile defense-capable cruisers and destroyers, and additional fighter jets to the Middle East.[7] The United States recently deployed F-22 Raptors and the USS Georgia guided-missile submarine to the region and ordered the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group to accelerate its transit to the region.[8]

The Artesh—the conventional Iranian military—appears to be preparing for a possible Iranian attack on Israel. Artesh Air Force Commander Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi visited the Shahid Nojeh Airbase in Hamedan Province on August 13.[9] Vahedi stressed that the Artesh Air Force is ready for “any dangerous task” during his visit.[10] The visit comes as Iran issued on August 11 a notice to airmen that covers the Shahid Nojeh Airbase until August 14.[11] The Artesh Navy has separately conducted a military exercise in the Caspian Sea near the port city of Astara.[12] This flurry of Artesh activity could be part of preparations to defend against an Israeli retaliation if Iran launches another large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel.

Russian President Vladimir Putin met with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Moscow on August 13.[13] Putin reaffirmed Russian support for Palestinian statehood and said that an independent Palestinian state is essential to peace in the Middle East.[14] Putin also pledged to continue to support Palestine amid the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.[15] Abbas welcomed Russian support and called on the UN Security Council to ”stop the actions that Israel is taking” in the Gaza Strip.[16]

Iran showcased its drone and missile technologies at a Russian military exhibition in Moscow on August 12.[17] The display included the Iranian Mohajer-10 drone, which was first unveiled in August 2023.[18] The Mohajer-10 has a range of around 2,000 kilometers, can fly for up to 24 hours, and can carry a payload of 300 kilograms.[19] Iranian Brigadier General Ali Shadmani claimed at the exhibition that Iranian drones are “world famous.”[20] Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu and Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation Director Dmitry Shugayev visited the Iranian booth at the exhibition.[21] Iran has sold Mohajer-6 drones to Russia in recent years to support the Russian invasion of Ukraine and may hope to soon sell the more advanced Mohajer-10s. There is precedent for Russia buying Iranian systems presented at this exhibition. Iran previously showcased the Ababil close-range ballistic missile for the first time at the same Russian military exhibition in August 2023.[22] Tehran and Moscow later signed an agreement in December 2023 for the sale of Ababil missiles to Russia.[23]

The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) seized ground east of al Tanf along the Iraq-Syria border, according to a pro-Syrian regime observer on X (Twitter).[24] The area east of al Tanf is unpopulated desert. The Syrian regime redeployed elements of two key units to the nearby central Syrian desert in early Summer 2024 in order to counter growing ISIS activity there.[25] The border area around al Tanf, especially in Iraq’s Anbar Province, is critical terrain for ISIS. ISIS leaders, including former so-called Caliph Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, used the region in the early 2010s to meet with key leaders.[26] The area is also important for smuggling of weapons, goods, oil, and people—all resources ISIS has historically exploited to advance its agenda.[27]

Key Takeaways:

• Israel: Iran is likely trying to expand divisions within Israel and between Israel and the United States ahead of a possible Iranian drone and missile attack.
• Iran: The Artesh—the conventional Iranian military—appears to be preparing for a possible Iranian attack on Israel.
• West Bank: Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow.
• Russia: Iran showcased its drone and missile technologies, including the new Mohajer-10 drone, at a Russian military exhibition in Moscow.
• ISIS: The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) reportedly seized ground east of al Tanf along the Iraq-Syria border.

Iran Update, August 12, 2024

US and Israeli officials have warned that Iran will likely conduct a large-scale, coordinated attack targeting Israel in the days ahead.[i] White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby expressed concern on August 12 about the “increasing probability that Iran and its proxies will attack in the coming days.”[ii] Israel similarly assesses that Iran will likely attack Israel directly “within days,” according to unspecified sources speaking to Axios.[iii] These warnings are consistent with Western intelligence sources previously assessing that Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah may attack Israel on the Jewish holiday Tisha B’Av on August 12-13.[iv]

The unspecified sources separately told Axios that the Israel expects Lebanese Hezbollah to attack first followed by a direct Iranian attack.[v] Axios similarly reported on August 5 that the United States expects Iran and its Axis of Resistance to conduct “two waves” of attacks on Israel, citing unspecified US officials.[vi] The officials added that the Iran-Hezbollah attack will likely be “bigger” than the Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel in April 2024 and that Iran and Hezbollah might target military sites near civilian areas.[vii] These statements are all consistent with CTP-ISW's ongoing assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel in response to Israel killing senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Ismail Haniyeh, in recent weeks.[viii]

The United States deployed the USS Georgia guided-missile submarine to the Middle East and ordered the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group, which is equipped with F-35C fighter jets, to accelerate its transit to the region on August 12.[ix] The deployment of the USS Georgia is part of US force posture changes ahead of Iran’s and Iranian-backed groups’ expected attack on Israel. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin announced the deployment following a phone call with Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, during which Austin emphasized the United States’ “commitment to take every possible step to defend Israel.”[x] The US Department of Defense previously announced on August 2 that it would deploy air- and sea-based cruise missile defenses, ballistic missile defense-capable cruisers and destroyers, and additional fighter jets to the Middle East.[xi] F-22 Raptors arrived in the Middle East on August 8.[xii]

Iran is expected to imminently deliver hundreds of ballistic missiles to Russia to support its invasion of Ukraine.[xiii] European intelligence sources told Reuters that Iran and Russia signed a contract in December 2023 for Iran to deliver Ababil close-range ballistic missiles[xiv] Fateh-360 short-range ballistic missiles to Russia. This reporting is consistent with a previous Wall Street Journal report saying that a Russian delegation visited an Iran in December 2023 to “observe” Iranian [xv] including the Ababil missile. Ababil missiles have a range of around 86 kilometers[xvi] Iranian Defense and Armed Forces Logistics Ministry officials displayed a miniature replica of the Ababil missile for the first time at a Russian military exhibition in August 2023. IRGC Aerospace Force Commander Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajji Zadeh later showcased an Ababil missile during former Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu’s visit to Tehran in September 2023. Fateh-360 msiles have a range of around 120 kilomers and can rry[xvii]payload of 150 kilograms. The European intelligence sources speaking to Reuters [xviii]that dozens of Russian military personnel are currently training in Iran on how to operate Fateh-360 missiles.[xix]

Western and Ukrainian sources have previously warned that Iran may be preparing to provide Russia with short-range ballistic systems, including multiple systems with maximum ranges and payloads significantly greater than the limits imposed upon Russia under its Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) obligations.[xx] The missiles that Iran is planning to deliver to Russia are too short-range for Iran to be able to use them against Israel, so Iran may not feel that providing these missiles to Russia will reduce its ability to conduct an effective direct attack on Israel. These short-range ballistic missiles will likely allow Russian forces to strike Ukrainian near-rear targets while reserving its own missile stockpiles (such as Iskander missiles) for deep-rear Ukrainian targets.[xxi] [Note: A similar version of this text appears in CTP-ISW's Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, August 10, 2024.]

Iranian Khatam ol Anbia Central Headquarters Coordination Deputy Brigadier General Ali Shadmani traveled to Moscow on August 12 to attend an annual Russian military exhibition.[xxii] The Khatam ol Anbia Central Headquarters is the highest Iranian operational headquarters and is responsible for joint and wartime operations.[xxiii] Iranian state media reported that Shadmani will meet with senior Russian military officials, view “the latest combat technologies” at the Army 2024 military exhibition, and meet with high-ranking foreign military delegations on the sidelines of the exhibition.[xxiv] An Iranian military delegation headed by Armed Forces General Staff Deputy Chief Brigadier General Aziz Nasir Zadeh visited the Army 2023 Russian military exhibition in August 2023.[xxv] The Iranian Defense and Armed Forces Logistics Ministry showcased a variety of Iranian-made defense products, including air defense systems, drones, and missiles, at the exhibition in 2023.[xxvi]

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian submitted 19 cabinet minister nominations to Parliament on August 11.[xxvii] Pezeshkian nominated five individuals who held senior positions in the Hassan Rouhani administration and three individuals who held senior positions in the Ebrahim Raisi administration.[xxviii] Pezeshkian nominated one woman. The average age of his proposed cabinet is 59.7 years old.[xxix] Parliament will begin voting to approve the nominees on August 17.[xxx] Pezeshkian nominated the following individuals:

• Aziz Nasir Zadeh: Defense and Armed Forces Logistics Minister
• Abbas Araghchi: Foreign Affairs Minister
• Esmail Khatib: Intelligence and Security Minister
• Eskandar Momeni: Interior Minister
• Ali Reza Kazemi: Education Minister
• Sattar Hashemi: Information and Communications Technology Minister

• Abdul Naser Hemmati: Economic Affairs and Finance Minister
• Mohammad Reza Zafar Ghandi: Health, Treatment, and Medical Education Minister

• Ahmad Midari: Cooperatives, Labor, and Social Welfare Minister
• Gholam Reza Nouri Ghazaljeh: Agricultural Jihad Minister
• Amin Hossein Rahimi: Justice Minister
• Farzaneh Sadegh Malvajard: Roads and Urban Development Minister
• Mohammad Atabek: Industry, Mining, and Trade Minister
• Hossein Simai Saraf: Science, Research, and Technology Minister
• Abbas Salehi: Culture and Islamic Guidance Minister
• Mohammad Reza Salehi Amiri: Cultural Heritage, Tourism, and Handicrafts Minister
• Mohsen Pak Nejad: Oil Minister
• Abbas Ali Abadi: Energy Minister
• Ahmed Dunyamali: Sports and Youth Minister

Aziz Nasir Zadeh currently serves as the Armed Forces General Staff (AFGS) deputy chief.[xxxi] Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei appointed Nasir Zadeh as AFGS deputy chief in September 2021—the first time an Artesh Air Force officer has held such a senior position in the military hierarchy.[xxxii] Nasir Zadeh is a former F-14 pilot who served as the commander of the Artesh Air Force from 2018 to 2021.[xxxiii] Nasir Zadeh began his military career as a pilot in the Artesh Air Force during the Iran-Iraq War.[xxxiv]

Abbas Araghchi played a prominent role in the nuclear negotiations with the West under the Hassan Rouhani administration and served as Rouhani's deputy foreign affairs minister for policy between 2017 and 2021.[xxxv][xxxvi]

Esmail Khatib served as intelligence and security minister under former President Ebrahim Raisi. Khatib has close ties to both Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the IRGC.[xxxvii] Khatib previously headed the security department of the US-sanctioned bonyad Astan Quds Razavi. Khatib recently claimed that Israel killed Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran “with the green light of the United States.”[xxxviii]

Eskandar Momeni served in the IRGC Ground Forces 25th Karbala Division during the Iran-Iraq war. Momeni later served as the Khorasan Razavi Province police chief when Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf was the Law Enforcement Command (LEC) commander.[xxxix] Momeni was also the LEC deputy commander and most recently headed the LEC Anti-Narcotics Headquarters.[xl]

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian filled four cabinet positions on August 10. Pezeshkian retained Mohammad Eslami as director of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization.[xli] Eslami has held this position since August 2021.[xlii] Pezeshkian also appointed Saeed Ohadi as president of the Martyrs’ and Veterans’ Affairs Foundation, which is affiliated with the IRGC and provides loans to former Iranian military personnel and their families.[xliii] Ohadi previously headed the foundation from 2020 to 2021 under former President Hassan Rouhani.[xliv] Ohadi was a deputy tourism minister in the Ebrahim Raisi administration.[xlv] Pezeshkian lastly appointed Zahra Behrouz Azar as vice president for women and family affairs and Hossein Afshin as vice president for science, technology, and the knowledge-based economy.[xlvi]

Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister-designate Abbas Araghchi described his foreign policy agenda during a meeting with the Iranian Parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Committee on August 12.[xlvii] Araghchi stated that he would pursue, as foreign minister, “hostility management” with the United States and ”honorable, functional, and opportunity-oriented interactions” with Europe. Araghchi further said that he would try to both lift and neutralize sanctions.[xlviii] Lifting sanctions refers to pursuing nuclear negotiations with the West, while neutralizing sanctions refers to mitigating the effect of sanctions by building indigenous capacities and bilateral relationships with regional and extra-regional countries. Araghchi’s comments mirror recent statements from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei about nuclear negotiations. Khamenei said on July 21 that the Masoud Pezeshkian administration should try to both lift and neutralize sanctions.[xlix] Araghchi is likely trying to present himself as completely aligned with Khamenei in order to increase the likelihood that Parliament will approve him as foreign minister.

Mohammad Javad Zarif resigned as Iranian vice president for strategic affairs on August 11—only 10 days after Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian appointed him to the position.[l] Zarif is known most prominently for his role as Iranian foreign affairs minister from 2013 to 2021. Zarif presented his resignation as vice president for strategic affairs as his response to Pezeshkian submitting his cabinet nominees to Parliament. Zarif expressed disappointment with the nominees and claimed that only three of the nominees were the top recommendations of the transition team, which Zarif led. Zarif in announcing his resignation apologized to the Iranian people for failing to secure a younger and more diverse list of nominees.[li] Zarif has a long history of tendering his resignation from senior regime positions in order to protest certain intra-regime dynamics or political outcomes.[lii]

The Iraqi Resistance Coordination Committee—a coordinating body for Iranian-backed Iraqi militias—threatened to attack US forces if the United States conducts attacks within Iraq or uses Iraqi airspace to attack Iran.[liii] The coordination committee added that it is not “bound by any restrictions” regarding attacking US forces.[liv] Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, mostly operating under the Islamic Resistance in Iraq moniker, conducted over 170 attacks targeting US troops in Iraq and Syria between October 2023-January 2024.[lv] A member of Iranian-backed Iraqi militia Harakat al Nujaba’s (HHN) political bureau, Mahdi al Kaabi, announced the [lvi]attacks on July 30. Iranian-backed Iraqi militia e claimed six attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria since July 17, when CTP-ISW assessed the mil[lvii]resume their attack campaign targeting US forces in the Middle East.

Iraqi media reported on August 11 that this announcement follows a conversation between US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al Sudani about US force protection in Iraq.[lviii] Sudani is trying to limit escalation between the United States and Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, according to multiple Iraqi media outlets on August 12.[lix] An unspecified source claimed that Sudani requested a guarantee from Blinken that the United States would not attack any sites tied to the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) in return for Sudani trying to keep the Iranian-backed Iraqi militias from attacking US forces.[lx] The United States has conducted multiple self-defense strikes targeting Iranian-backed militia sites in Iraq, including a July 30 strike on militants who were preparing to launch a one-way attack drone at an International Coalition base.[lxi] Another source “close to the Iraqi factions” reported that Sudani sent a message to the Iranian-backed Iraqi militias confirming that the Iraqi federal government is working to remove US forces from Iraq but adding that the Iraqi federal government will not allow violations of the law or any targeting operations against US forces.[lxii]

An anonymous Islamic Resistance in Iraq source told Lebanese outlet al Akhbar that the Islamic Resistance in Iraq is developing “new mechanisms” for attacking Israel and US forces in Iraq and Syria.[lxiii] The source specified that one such strategy has been deliberately conducting operations under militias with unknown names, headquarters, and leaders.[lxiv] Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have notably used facade groups to obscure their involvement in attacks and operations since 2020.[lxv] Newly formed militia al Thawriyyun has conducted three attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria since July 25 and may have ties to Iranian-backed Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah.[lxvi] The  Islamic Resistance in Iraq source added that the group is constantly coordinating with “fronts” in Yemen and Lebanon, implying the Houthis and Hezbollah.[lxvii] CTP-ISW has previously observed multiple instances of coordination between Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in recent months.[lxviii]

Hamas has refused to participate in ceasefire-hostage negotiations in Qatar scheduled for August 15.[lxix] Hamas asked international mediators on August 11 to ” oblige” Israel to accept “a plan to implement” a previous ceasefire proposal that Hamas submitted in July 2024—instead of conducting further negotiations.[lxx] This Hamas ceasefire proposal reportedly compromised on one of Hamas’ maximalist demands by allowing a partial IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip during the first phase of a three-phase ceasefire agreement.[lxxi] Hamas’ previous position demanded a complete IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip during the first phase.[lxxii] Hamas also stated that Israel killing of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and a recent Israeli airstrike in Gaza City showed that Israel is “not serious about a permanent ceasefire.”[lxxiii] The United States, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates released a joint statement on August 8 calling on Israel and Hamas to join a final round of negotiations.[lxxiv]

Hamas also condemned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for adding “new conditions that were not proposed throughout the negotiation process.”[lxxv] Hamas was likely referring to Netanyahu’s office releasing a statement in July 2024 identifying four “non-negotiable principles” for a deal with Hamas.[lxxvi] These principles were not present in previous unofficial ceasefire proposals negotiated between Israel and Hamas. These principles involve Israel retaining control of the Netzarim and Philadelphi corridors, monitoring the flow of Palestinians into the northern Gaza Strip, and obtaining the “maximum number of live hostages. . . in the first phase of the three-stage deal.”[lxxvii] Israel and Hamas had previously discussed releasing female, elderly, and injured hostages in the first phase of the deal, making the latter principle a particularly notable change from previous negotiations.[lxxviii]

Key Takeaways:

• Israel: US and Israeli officials have warned that Iran will likely conduct a large-scale, coordinated attack targeting Israel in the days ahead. These statements are all consistent with CTP-ISW's ongoing assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel in response to Israel killing senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Ismail Haniyeh, in recent weeks.
• Russia: Iran is expected to imminently deliver hundreds of ballistic missiles to Russia to support its invasion of Ukraine. Western and Ukrainian sources have previously warned that Iran may be preparing to provide Russia with short-range ballistic systems, including multiple systems with maximum ranges and payloads significantly greater than the limits imposed upon Russia under its Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) obligations.
• Iran: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian submitted 19 cabinet minister nominations to Parliament. Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister-designate Abbas Araghchi described his foreign policy agenda during a meeting with the Iranian Parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Committee.
• Iraq: The Iraqi Resistance Coordination Committee—a coordinating body for Iranian-backed Iraqi militias—threatened to attack US forces if the United States conducts attacks within Iraq or uses Iraqi airspace to attack Iran.
• Gaza Strip: Hamas has refused to participate in ceasefire-hostage negotiations in Qatar scheduled for August 15.

Iran Update, August 11, 2024

Iran has not retaliated quickly against Israel because Iran very likely seeks to ensure that its next attack restores deterrence with Israel while simultaneously avoiding a large-scale war. Iran previously attacked Israel on April 13, 12 days after Israel killed one of Iran’s senior-most military commanders in Syria on April 1.[i] Iran and its allies fired around 170 one-way attack drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles at Israel in its April 2024 attack.[ii] The United States, Israel, and their allies intercepted most of the projectiles, and the Iranian attack did significantly less damage than Tehran intended.[iii] Iranian leaders are therefore incentivized to carefully and slowly calculate their next attack to ensure that the attack inflicts serious damage on Israel, thereby restoring Iranian deterrence with Israel. Iran is very likely also ensuring that the attack will not trigger a major war. Western intelligence sources previously assessed that Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah may attack Israel on the Jewish holiday Tisha B’Av on August 12-13, although Iran might wait longer to conduct its next attack to ensure that the attack achieves its strategic goals.[iv]

Iran also intends to stoke fear and anxiety among Israelis by slowing its response and capitalizing on speculation about when and how it will respond. Iranian armed forces-run outlet Defa Press claimed on August 11 that Iran is conducting a “flawless psychological war” against Israel by drawing out its retaliation.[v] Defa Press claimed that Iran’s psychological war on Israel has disrupted Israelis’ daily routines and stagnated the Israeli economy. Defa Press also claimed that many Israelis have tried to flee Israel since the start of the Israel-Hamas war in October 2023. This claim is consistent with CTP-ISW's assessment that part of Iranian leaders’ theory on how to destroy Israel revolves around stoking instability and terror in Israel to catalyze reverse migration away from Israel.[vi] A member of the Iranian Parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Committee separately asserted on August 10 that “keeping Israel in limbo is part of the revenge operation.”[vii] Iran similarly exploited uncertainty surrounding its “imminent” attack in April 2024 to stoke terror in Israel, as CTP-ISW previously reported on April 11, two days before Iran attacked Israel on April 13.[viii]

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) is conducting a military exercise in Kermanshah Province in western Iran between August 9 and 13 to “enhance combat readiness and vigilance.”[ix] The Najaf-e Ashraf Operational Base, which covers Kermanshah, Hamedan, and Ilam provinces, is overseeing the exercise.[x] The 29th IRGC Nabi Akram Division operates under the Najaf-e Ashraf Operational Base.[xi] Iran separately issued a notice to airmen (NOTAM) on August 10 warning pilots not to fly near the Nojeh Airbase in Hamedan Province between August 11 and 14.[xii] This NOTAM is similar to previous Iranian NOTAMs issued over the last week.[xiii]

Hardline parliamentarian Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani claimed on August 10 that Iran could conduct a series of attacks targeting Israel over three or four days.[xiv] Ardestani also claimed that Iran may refrain from retaliating against Israel if Israel reaches a ceasefire deal with Hamas. Ardestani may have made this statement to set conditions for Iran to be able to blame a potential attack on Israel on the Israeli government’s failure to agree to a ceasefire. Ardestani finally claimed that Iran could use 600 projectiles in its next attack on Israel, in contrast to the approximately 300 drones and missiles it used in its April 2024 attack. Ardestani’s comments were speculative in nature, and he is very likely not privy to information regarding Iran’s retaliation given his current role as a parliamentarian. Ardestani has previously made speculative comments about Iran’s nuclear program, such as in May 2024 when he claimed that Iran had developed nuclear weapons.[xv] 

The August 10 drone attack that targeted US forces at the Rumalyn Landing Zone in northeastern Syria wounded several US and coalition personnel.[xvi] Initial reports previously showed that the attack had not caused any injuries.[xvii] An unspecified US official told Reuters on August 11, however, that some personnel are undergoing testing for traumatic brain injuries.[xviii] The August 10 attack follows a rocket attack that injured at least five US personnel at Ain al Assad Airbase in Iraq on August 5.[xix]

Key Takeaways: 

• Iranian Retaliation: Iran has not retaliated quickly against Israel because Iran very likely seeks to ensure that its next attack restores deterrence with Israel while simultaneously avoiding a large-scale war. Iran also intends to stoke fear and anxiety among Israelis by slowing its response and capitalizing on speculation about when and how it will respond.
• Iraq and Syria: The August 10 drone attack that targeted US forces at the Rumalyn Landing Zone in northeastern Syria wounded several US and coalition personnel. An unspecified US official told Reuters that some personnel are undergoing testing for traumatic brain injuries.
• Gaza Strip: The IDF issued evacuation orders for central Khan Younis on August 10.

Iran Update, August 10, 2024

Different elements of the Iranian regime have advocated for varying responses to Israel’s killing of Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31. The different messages across the regime are very likely emblematic of differences in opinion between different camps in the regime. The messages may also reflect changes in position within these camps. Senior Iranian military and security officials, as well as Iranian armed forces- and IRGC-affiliated media, have suggested that Iran and its Axis of Resistance seek to conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack on Israel.[i] Iranian Supreme Leader Adviser Ali Shamkhani, for example, claimed on August 10 that Israel “only understands [the] language of force.”[ii] Iranian armed forces-run outlet Defa Press separately published an article on August 10 speculating that Iran could attack Tel Aviv and Haifa.[iii] The publication of this article does not necessarily mean that Iran will target Tel Aviv and Haifa, and more likely reflects the Iranian armed forces’ general desire to strike Israel directly. Other elements of the regime, including moderate President Masoud Pezeshkian, have advocated for attacking “secret Israeli bases” in Iraqi Kurdistan or Azerbaijan to avoid a direct conflict with Israel.[iv] It is not possible to conclusively determine from individual statements exactly how and when Iran will respond to Israel given that these statements intentionally and unintentionally obfuscate regime discussions and Iran’s intent behind a potential attack.

The general trends reflected in Iranian rhetoric, however, support CTP-ISW's ongoing assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack on Israel. The number of Iranian official statements vowing a “harsh” and “forceful” response to Israel far outweigh the number of statements calling for a more limited response. CTP-ISW's assessment is also not only based on Iranian rhetorical statements, but also on CTP-ISW's prior assessments about Iranian objectives and perceived strategic requirements. CTP-ISW previously assessed that Iran likely seeks to restore deterrence after its unsuccessful April 2024 attack while simultaneously trying to avoid a large-scale war with Israel.[v] Iran and its allies fired around 170 one-way attack drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles at Israel in the April 2024 attack.[vi] The United States, Israel, and their allies intercepted most of the projectiles, and the Iranian attack did significantly less damage than Tehran intended.[vii] CTP-ISW previously assessed that Iran could modify its April 2024 attack model in several ways, including by increasing the volume of projectiles it fires at Israel or changing the number of locations in Israel that it targets, to increase the likelihood of inflicting serious damage on Israel.[viii] CTP-ISW will continue to track and report the general trends in Iranian rhetoric across different elements of the regime while highlighting which elements of the regime likely have the most influence.

Unspecified Iranian-backed Iraqi fighters conducted a drone attack targeting US forces at the Rumalyn Landing Zone in Hasakah Province, Syria, on August 9.[ix] An unspecified US official told Reuters that the attack does not appear to have caused injuries but that medical evaluations are ongoing.[x] Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have claimed six attacks targeting US forces in Iraq and Syria since late mid-July 2024.[xi] CTP-ISW assessed on July 17 that Iranian-backed Iraqi militias appear to have resumed their attack campaign targeting US forces in the Middle East.[xii]

Key Takeaways: 

• Iranian Retaliation: Different elements of the Iranian regime have advocated for varying responses to Israel’s killing of Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31. The general trends reflected in Iranian rhetoric, however, support CTP-ISW's ongoing assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack on Israel. The different messages across the regime are very likely emblematic of differences in opinion between different camps in the regime. The messages may also reflect changes in position within these camps. It is not possible to conclusively determine from individual statements exactly how and when Iran will respond to Israel given that these statements intentionally and unintentionally obfuscate regime discussions and Iran’s intent behind a potential attack.
• Iraq and Syria: Unspecified Iranian-backed Iraqi fighters conducted a drone attack targeting US forces at the Rumalyn Landing Zone in Hasakah Province, Syria, on August 9.
• Gaza Strip: The IDF Air Force targeted a group of Hamas fighters in a mosque at the al Tabaeen school in al Daraj, Gaza City on August 10.

Iran Update, August 9, 2024

CTP-ISW continues to assess that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will likely conduct a coordinated strike targeting Israel in retaliation for the death of former Hamas Political Bureau head Ismail Haniyeh on July 31. Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has continued to communicate that Iran will retaliate “forcefully” against Israel to restore deterrence. Three anonymous Iranian officials told the New York Times that Khamenei ordered a direct strike on Israel during the SNSC meeting on August 7.[i] Khamenei later published a statement that blamed Israel directly and vowed retaliation, and his personal website published an article on August 8 arguing that it is Iran’s duty to seek retribution for the death of Haniyeh.[ii] The article stated that Iran is prepared to respond with “authority.”[iii] Other top Iranian officials who would be involved in the planning and execution of the strike have also threatened Israel in response to Haniyeh’s death. Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Deputy Commander Brigadier General Ali Fadavi stated that Khamenei has ordered Iranian forces to “harshly punish” Israel for the death of Haniyeh.[iv] IRGC Quds Force Commander Brigadier General Esmail Ghaani similarly restated Khamenei’s orders to ”avenge” Haniyeh’s death in a letter to Hamas’ new Political Bureau head Yahya Sinwar on August 9.[v] Ghaani reassured Sinwar that Iran will inflict a harsh punishment on Israel for Haniyeh’s death. Khamenei holds ultimate decision-making power in Iran and would have to approve any retaliatory strike on Israel, making his statements on the strike particularly noteworthy.

This coordinated strike will likely include two waves of attacks from Iran and its Axis of Resistance. Western intelligence officials continue to assess that Iran, and its Axis of Resistance will conduct two waves of attacks targeting Israel. Two Israeli officials and a senior Western intelligence official cited by the Wall Street Journal on August 9 said that the latest intelligence suggests that Hezbollah and members of Iran’s Axis of Resistance will likely conduct the first wave of attacks targeting Israel.[vi] The sources said that Iran is expected to conduct a second independent wave of attacks on Israel. This is consistent with an Axios report on August 5, which highlighted a similar scenario two-wave scenario.[vii] The Axios report did not, however, make clear whether Iran or Hezbollah would launch the first attack. Unspecified sources ”familiar with intelligence [about the attacks]” told CNN that  Hezbollah is prepared to strike Israel independent of Iran.[viii]

Iran and Hezbollah leaders may choose to conduct separate waves of attacks—as described by the New York Times on August 9—to satisfy divergent goals and priorities.[ix] CTP-ISW noted that Iran and Hezbollah have partially divergent imperatives that could create friction between the two parties and disagreement on the timing and coordination of an attack.[x] Both groups want to establish deterrence with Israel but may have different feelings of urgency. Hezbollah leaders may feel increasing pressure to retaliate given repeated Israeli operations that have killed Hezbollah commanders in southern Lebanon and Syria since the targeted killing of Fuad Shukr in Beirut on July 30.[xi] Iranian decisionmakers are likely not under the same temporal pressure as Hezbollah given that Israel has not continued to conduct attacks in Iran or against Iranian targets since killing Haniyeh on July 31. Iranian leaders are likely incentivized to carefully and slowly assemble a strike package that both hurts Israel and avoids escalation into a wider war.

Iranian-armed forces-affiliated Defa Press on August 9 accused the United States of disrupting GPS in Iran “in recent days.”[xii] Defa Press’s Defense and Security correspondent claimed that an investigation into the incident determined that the United States was attempting to disrupt Iran’s retaliation against Israel. Defa Press claimed that Iranian and Axis of Resistance drones and missiles use an advanced navigation system that does not rely on GPS. Countries may undertake certain defensive measures like GPS spoofing as defensive measures against missile strikes. Israeli forces implemented GPS spoofing over Israeli territory ahead of Iran’s April 2024 strike.[xiii]

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is reportedly at odds with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) over how to respond to Israel’s killing of Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, highlighting the likely existence of fissures between the relatively moderate president and some elements of the IRGC. Iranian presidential aides told The Telegraph on August 9 that the IRGC wants to directly strike military targets in Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities, while Pezeshkian seeks to avoid a direct attack on Israel.[xiv] Pezeshkian has reportedly instead suggested striking “secret Israeli bases” in Azerbaijan or Iraqi Kurdistan. The presidential aides claimed that Pezeshkian is concerned that a direct Iranian strike on Israel will cause an “all-out war." Pezeshkian is likely involved in discussions about Iran’s retaliation as the ex officio head of the Supreme National Security Council, which is the senior-most Iranian defense and foreign policy body.[xv] Pezeshkian is not part of the Iranian chain of command, however, and therefore has no direct control over the regime’s response to Israel. Other ex officio members of the SNSC, including SNSC Secretary Ali Akbar Ahmadian, Armed Forces General Staff Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri, IRGC Commander Major General Hossein Salami, and Artesh Commander Abdol Rahim Mousavi, in contrast, will play a much more direct and significant role in Iran’s retaliation because they either have roles in planning and execution or are close to key decisionmakers, like the supreme leader.[xvi] Ahmadian stated on July 31 that Iran will have a “serious presence” in the retaliation for Haniyeh’s death, suggesting that Ahmadian is aligned with the elements of the IRGC that are advocating for a direct attack on Israel.[xvii]

It is not surprising that Pezeshkian would oppose a direct attack on Israel. Pezeshkian and his administration—not the IRGC commanders responsible for conducting an attack—would have to respond to international backlash and criticism of an Iranian attack on Israel. Pezeshkian has also repeatedly expressed support for resuming nuclear negotiations with the West, and an Iranian attack on Israel would likely undermine Pezeshkian’s efforts to resume such negotiations.[xviii] Pezeshkian’s aides may have intentionally chosen to speak to an English-language outlet to try to preserve Pezeshkian’s image as a “moderate” politician who seeks to preserve stability in the Middle East and mend ties with the West.

An unspecified US official told the Wall Street Journal on August 9 that the US intelligence community continues to assess that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon but is improving its ability to do so if it chose.[xix] The official noted that Iran is conducting research that “could shrink the knowledge gap Tehran faces in mastering the ability to build a weapon,” but that the US intelligence community does not believe that this research would shorten the time Iran needs to produce a nuclear weapon. These statements follow a US Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) report on August 6 that noted that Iran is pursuing research “that better positions it to produce a nuclear device if it chooses to do so.”[xx]

Iran is continuing its efforts to develop military and defense cooperation with Belarus. Belarusian Air Force and Air Defense Force Commander Major General Andrei Yulianovich Lukyanovich met with Artesh Commander Major General Abdol Rahim Mousavi, Artesh Air Defense Force Commander Brigadier General Ali Reza Sabahi Fard, and Artesh Air Force Commander Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi in Tehran on August 7 and 8.[xxi] Lukyanovich and Mousavi discussed "threats“ faced by both Iran and Belarus, including US unilateralism and Western sanctions.[xxii] Mousavi stressed Belarus’s role as a barrier to NATO's expansion in Europe and emphasized Iran’s opposition to the growth of NATO.[xxiii]

The United States, United Arab Emirates, and Egypt released a joint statement on August 8 calling upon Israel and Hamas to join a final round of ceasefire and hostage negotiations.[xxiv]  President Biden, the Emir of Qatar Tamim bin Hamad al Thani and the President of Egypt Abdel Fattah al Sisi called on both Israel and Hamas to resume “urgent discussions” on August 15 in Doha or Cairo to close remaining gaps in an agreement based on the US-backed, UN Security Council-endorsed proposal.[xxv] The statement said that the mediating parties are prepared to present a “final bridging proposal” that resolves outstanding points of disagreement in a manner that can ideally meet both Israel’s and Hamas’ expectations.[xxvi] Axios reported that the planned round of negotiations is the Biden administration’s “hail mary” attempt to land a deal and prevent a regional war, citing a source familiar with the deliberations.[xxvii]  An anonymous senior Biden administration official said that there are “four or five issues” that need to be resolved or adjusted to achieve a deal.[xxviii] The specific issues and their relative magnitude and importance to the two sides is not clear. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Office said in a statement that it would send an Israeli negotiations team to participate in the US-UAE-Egypt-led effort on August 15.[xxix] Hamas has not responded as of this writing.

UAE state-owned media and Israeli media circulated conflicting reports on August 8 about Yahya Sinwar’s current posture on ceasefire and hostage negotiations with Israel. Sinwar’s position remains unclear, and it is not possible to assess the outcome of this round of negotiations with any certainty. An Egyptian journalist reported in UAE state-owned outlet The National on August 8 that Sinwar told to Egyptian mediators that he will be “uncompromising” on key maximalist Hamas demands in negotiations.[xxx] The Egyptian journalist, citing unspecified sources, said that Sinwar contacted Egyptian mediators shortly after his selection as Hamas’ new political leader to convey that he will continue to pursue a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the release of high-profile Palestinian detainees, particularly on the release of Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti and PFLP leader Ahmed Saadat.[xxxi] CTP-ISW Is unable to verify The National’s reporting, but that Sinwar would maintain his hardline posture is consistent with Sinwar’s previous refusal to moderate Hamas’ ceasefire positions, even when pressured by his superiors abroad and military subordinates in the Gaza Strip. Israeli outlet Channel 12 cited Hamas sources on August 8 who said that Sinwar instructed Hamas leaders to pursue a ceasefire and hostage deal “as soon as possible” before a potential escalation between Israel, Hezbollah and Iran.[xxxii] The Hamas sources claimed that Gaza military commanders are pressuring Sinwar to achieve a ceasefire quickly.[xxxiii] The Hamas sources did not specify the terms on which Sinwar is reportedly pushing for an immediate deal.[xxxiv]  

Key Takeaways: 

• Iranian Retaliation: CTP-ISW continues to assess that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will likely conduct a coordinated strike targeting Israel in retaliation for the death of former Hamas Political Bureau head Ismail Haniyeh on July 31. This coordinated strike will likely include two waves of attacks from Iran and its Axis of Resistance. Iran and Hezbollah leaders may choose to conduct separate waves of attacks—as described by the New York Times on August 9—to satisfy divergent goals and priorities.
• Iranian President and the IRGC: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is reportedly at odds with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) over how to respond to Israel’s killing of Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, highlighting the likely existence of fissures between the relatively moderate president and some elements of the IRGC. It is not surprising that Pezeshkian would oppose a direct attack on Israel, given Pezeshkian’s position and foreign policy priorities.
• Sinwar and Ceasefire Negotiations: The United States, United Arab Emirates, and Egypt released a joint statement on August 8 calling upon Israel and Hamas to join a final round of ceasefire and hostage negotiations. UAE state-owned media and Israeli media circulated conflicting reports on August 8 about Yahya Sinwar’s current posture on ceasefire and hostage negotiations with Israel. Sinwar’s position remains unclear, and it is not possible to assess the outcome of this round of negotiations with any certainty.
• Iran-Belarus: Iran is continuing its efforts to develop military and defense cooperation with Belarus.
• Iranian Nuclear Program: An unspecified US official told the Wall Street Journal on August 9 that the US intelligence community continues to assess that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon but is improving its ability to do so if it chose.

Iran Update, August 8, 2024

CTP-ISW continues to assess that coordinated large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel by Iran and its Axis of Resistance is the most likely Iranian response to Israel’s killing of senior axis leaders.[i]  CTP-ISW assessed on July 31 that a coordinated large-scale drone attack resembling the Iranian April 2024 attack on Israel was one of the most dangerous but not most likely courses of action.[ii] The Iranian regime’s public descriptions of a direct attack on Israel, including statements from senior Iranian officials and armed forces-affiliated outlets, caused CTP-ISW to judge that the most dangerous course of action was more likely to occur. (The most dangerous course of action Iran and its partners could pursue would actually be a full-scale attack on Israel and on US forces, but CTP-ISWs assesses that neither Iran nor Lebanese Hezbollah is at all likely to pursue such a course of action.) CTP-ISW is providing a forecast of the likelihood of a given Iranian action based on available data in an open-source environment. CTP-ISW is not offering a definitive prediction that Iran and its proxies and partners will undertake any specific action.

Senior Iranian security officials and an Iranian armed forces-affiliated outlet have discussed a possible Iranian and Hezbollah drone and missile strike in notable detail, including discussions about the Iranian partners involved, lists of possible targets, and descriptions of methods to increase the likelihood of a successful strike.[iii] Defa Press, an outlet run by an Iranian institution that reports directly to the Iranian Armed Forces General Staff (AFGS), published a list of potential targets and methods to increase the success of the attack, which increased CTP-ISW's confidence that Iran was considering a large-scale attack.[iv] The AFGS would be responsible for planning and conducting a retaliatory strike against Israel. Statements from Iranian decisionmakers have also increased CTP-ISW’s confidence that Iran will choose this dangerous course of action. Iranian AFGS Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri stated on August 1 that both Iran and the Axis of Resistance will be involved in the retaliation, indicating that Iran will directly strike Israel.[v] Supreme National Security Council secretary and acting Iranian foreign affairs minister both suggested that Iran would directly participate in the retaliation in statements on August 1 and August 7 respectively.[vi]

Iranian leaders may decide that Iran cannot successfully design and execute a strike that would penetrate Israeli air defenses to establish deterrence, despite strong statements by its officials and media. A second failure to penetrate Israeli air defenses would not restore deterrence and would therefore be counterproductive. Such a failure would demonstrate that Iran has limited effective answers to Israeli attacks on its senior leaders and inside its territory. Iranian decisionmakers could calculate that the negative effects of another failed attempt to strike Israeli territory outweigh the internal and regional reputational damage Iran would experience from not attacking Israel after openly discussing the attack. CTP-ISW assessed on August 1 that Iran is likely planning a retaliatory attack on Israel to restore deterrence after the unsuccessful Iranian April 2024 attack while simultaneously trying to avoid a large-scale war with Israel.[vii] Iran and its allies fired around 170 one-way attack drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles at Israel in the April 2024 attack.[viii] The United States, Israel, and their allies intercepted most of the projectiles, and the Iranian attack did significantly less damage than Tehran intended.[ix] Iranian leaders will likely want to be confident that Iran's munitions will penetrate Israeli air defenses and strike their intended targets to reestablish deterrence before authorizing a strike. Iranian leaders are also probably considering that Iran could establish nuclear deterrence in this direct attack on Israel by demonstrating an ability to strike Israeli territory with a delivery device capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. This requirement would not be satisfied if only drones or small missiles penetrated Israeli and partner air and missile defenses and would presumably need ballistic missiles to strike their targets.

Iranian leaders may additionally calculate that the risk of triggering a large-scale Israeli response is too high to justify conducting a coordinated large-scale missile and drone attack. Israeli military leaders’ public statements and back-channel messages from the United States have emphasized to both Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah that Israel would respond forcefully to an attack that kills Israeli civilians or causes significant damage.[x] Iran may calculate that the failure rate showed by Iranian missiles during the April 2024 attack makes the risk of causing unintentional casualties too great.[xi] Technical errors could cause severe collateral damage, as demonstrated by the recent Hezbollah attack that killed 12 Israeli children in the Golan Heights.[xii] This risk is higher given that many of the targets Iranian-armed forces affiliated sources have suggested are near densely populated areas.[xiii] Iranian leaders very likely assess that killing Israeli civilians or inflicting severe damage would trigger an expanded war, regardless of the intent of Iran's strike.

Divergent goals and priorities between Iran and Hezbollah could create friction between the two and disagreement on the timing and coordination of an attack. Unspecified US officials told Axios on August 5 that the US intelligence community expects Iran and its Axis of Resistance to conduct two waves of attacks against Israel.[xiv] Unspecified sources ”familiar with the intelligence” speaking to CNN have similarly claimed that Hezbollah is prepared to strike Israel independent of Iran.[xv] These divisions may be appearing because Hezbollah and Iran have different constraints and goals for a retaliatory attack on Israel. Both groups want to establish deterrence with Israel but may have differing urgency. Hezbollah may feel increasing pressure to retaliate given Israeli operations targeting Hezbollah commanders in southern Lebanon and Syria since the targeted killing of Fuad Shukr in Beirut on July 30.[xvi] Hezbollah is also constrained by the Lebanese political scene. Hezbollah leaders are likely additionally considering how a Hezbollah  retaliatory strike on Israel will effect if and when the IDF launches a major military operation into Lebanon. A Hezbollah retaliation that triggers an Israeli ground operation could be perceived as dragging all of Lebanon into Hezbollah’s war. Iranian decisionmakers are not under the same temporal pressure as Hezbollah given that Israel has not continued to conduct attacks in Iran or against Iranian targets since killing Haniyeh on July 31. Iranian leaders are likely incentivized to carefully and slowly assemble a strike package that both hurts Israel and avoids escalation into a wider war.  

Multiple Axis groups are noting that the delay in their retaliation against Israel for the targeted killing senior Hezbollah commander Fuad al Shukr and Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh is a tactical decision. Houthi supreme leader Abdulmalik al Houthi warned that a Houthi response to Israel is “on the way” and that “the delay in the axis’s response is only tactical, and no pressure or intimidation can dissuade from the decision to respond” on August 8.[xvii]  Abdulmalik’s statement echoes statements made by Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and senior Iranian officials. Nasrallah said on August 6 that the Axis of Resistance will respond, and that ”the state of waiting is part of the battle,” ”part of the punishment, [and] part of the response.”[xviii] The Iranian Supreme Leader’s representative to the IRGC said on July 31 that Israel should wait for a ”crushing answer” and that Iran will send a message that will ”put [Israel] in fear and worry for several days“. [xix]The Iranian official compared Iran’s decision to delay with the delay between Israel’s strike targeting IRGC Quds Force senior commander Mohammad Reza Zahedi on April 1 and the Iranian retaliation against Israel on April 13.[xx]

Iranian Acting Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Bagheri Kani met with several foreign officials on the sidelines of the emergency Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on August 7.[xxi] Bagheri Kani met separately with Jordanian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Ayman al Safadi and Saudi Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Walid al Khariji.[xxii] Bagheri Kani called on OIC member states to condemn Israel’s targeted killing of Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh and Israeli operations in the Gaza Strip.  Bagheri Kani recently held two phone calls with Safadi on August 2 and 4, during which Safadi underlined the necessity to prevent a wider regional war.[xxiii] Safadi then traveled to Iran on August 4, reportedly as part of a “last-ditch effort” to dissuade Iran from attacking Israel.[xxiv] Jordan’s efforts to prevent an Iranian attack were likely unsuccessful given that Iranian officials have repeatedly emphasized since July 31 the need to retaliate against Israel for killing Haniyeh in Iranian territory.[xxv] Bagheri Kani argued that Iran “has no choice” but to exercise its right to self-defense and restore deterrence against Israel at OIC meeting.[xxvi] Bagheri Kani may have warned Jordan and Saudi Arabia on August 8 not to defend Israel in an impending Iranian attack as they did during Iran’s April 13 drone and missile attack.[xxvii] This is consistent with CTP-ISW's assessment that Iran is likely planning a retaliatory attack on Israel to restore deterrence after the failed Iranian April 2024 attack while Iran simultaneously tries to avoid a large-scale war with Israel.[xxviii] Bagheri Kani also met with his Algerian and Pakistani counterparts on the sidelines of the OIC meeting.[xxix]

An unspecified informed source told IRGC-affiliated media on August 8 that Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has nominated his foreign affairs, defense, and intelligence ministers. [xxx] Pezeshkian very likely had to receive approval from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei prior to nominating these ministers given the sensitive nature of their positions. The source claimed that Pezeshkian nominated the following individuals:

• Foreign Affairs Minister: Abbas Araghchi. Araghchi played a prominent role in the nuclear negotiations with the West under the Hassan Rouhani administration and served as Rouhani's deputy foreign affairs minister for policy between 2017 and 2021.[xxxi] Pezeshkian’s nomination of Araghchi would therefore signal his intent to seriously pursue nuclear negotiations with the West. Iranian and Western media previously reported that Pezeshkian had nominated Araghchi as his foreign affairs minister, although Pezeshkian has not publicly confirmed Araghchi’s nomination.[xxxii]
• Defense and Armed Forces Logistics Minister: Aziz Nasir Zadeh. Nasir Zadeh currently serves as the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces.[xxxiii] Nasir Zadeh is a former F-14 pilot who served as the commander of the Artesh Air Force from 2018 to 2021.[xxxiv] Nasir Zadeh began his military career as a pilot in the Artesh Air Force during the Iran-Iraq War.[xxxv]
• Intelligence Minister: Esmail Khatib. Khatib served as the intelligence minister under former Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi.[xxxvi] Khatib has close ties to both Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the IRGC.[xxxvii] Khatib previously headed the security department of the US-sanctioned bonyad Astan Quds Razavi. Khatib recently claimed that Israel killed Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran “with the green light of the United States.”[xxxviii]

An Israeli military correspondent and local sources reported the IDF re-entered Khan Younis to conduct a new clearing operation on August 8, two weeks after the IDF withdrew from the area.[xxxix]

The IDF issued evacuation orders for civilians in central and eastern Khan Younis on August 8.[xl] Local videos showed thousands of Palestinians evacuating west to al Mawasi humanitarian zone.[xli] An Israeli Army Radio correspondent reported that the IDF ground forces began operating in eastern Khan Younis on the evening of August 8.[xlii] Local Palestinian sources reported IDF artillery shelling and helicopter fire in the eastern Khan Younis neighborhoods of Qarara, Abasan, and Zanna.[xliii]  The re-entry of ground forces into Khan Younis marks the IDF’s third clearing operation there.[xliv] The IDF 98th Division previously operated in Khan Younis for eight days at the end of July 2024.[xlv] The IDF reported that on July 22 that Hamas fighters had infiltrated into previously cleared areas of Khan Younis and had re-established militia infrastructure in the area, necessitating the re-clearing operation.[xlvi] The IDF has not confirmed its current operation in Khan Younis or its purpose as of this writing.

The Hamas Khan Younis Brigade is building improvised explosive devices from unexploded ordinance as part of its effort to regenerate forces there. Hamas claimed that its Khan Younis Brigade used unexploded ordinance from an F16 to manufacture an IED that they used in an attack in al Faraheen, east of Khan Younis, on August 5.[xlvii] Repurposing unexploded ordinance and then using the ordinance as an improvised explosive device requires some level of explosives expertise to deconstruct a live munition and then reconstruct the explosives into an IED. This Hamas report is consistent with a report from Israeli Army Radio, which is a state-owned news outlet run by the IDF. Israeli Army Radio reported on June 24 that Hamas is establishing small weapons manufacturing sites across the Gaza Strip to replenish its stockpiles of military equipment and weapons.[xlviii] This process—exemplified both by the Israeli Army Radio report and the Hamas claim about the attack in al Faraheen—is one component of regeneration.[xlix] Regeneration, which is part of reconstituting military units, is a resource-intensive, and time-intensive process that requires large-scale replacement of personnel, equipment and supplies and involves replenishing reserves of weapons and other materiel.[l] The manufacture of IEDs on a small scale, however, does not indicate full or large-scale reconstitution of forces to fully supplied or manned levels.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that US Air Force F22 Raptors arrived in the Middle East on August 8 as part of US force posture changes ahead of Iran’s and Iranian-backed groups’ expected attack on Israel.[li] CENTCOM said that the US aircraft would “mitigate the possibility of regional escalation” by Iran or Iranian-backed groups.[lii] CENTCOM Commander General Michael Kurilla visited Israel on August 8 to meet senior Israeli security officials.[liii] Kurilla previously visited Israel on August 5 to finalize US-Israeli defense coordination.[liv]

Key Takeaways: 

• Iranian Retaliation: CTP-ISW continues to assess that coordinated large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel by Iran and its Axis of Resistance is the most likely Iranian response to Israel’s killing of senior axis leaders. Iranian leaders may decide that Iran cannot successfully design and execute a strike that would penetrate Israeli air defenses to establish deterrence, despite strong statements by its officials and media. Iranian leaders may additionally calculate that the risk of triggering a large-scale Israeli response is too high to justify conducting a coordinated large-scale missile and drone attack.
• Hezbollah Retaliation: Divergent goals and priorities between Iran and Hezbollah could create friction between the two and disagreement on the timing and coordination of an attack. These divisions may be appearing because Hezbollah and Iran have different constraints and goals for a retaliatory attack on Israel. Both groups want to establish deterrence with Israel but may have differing urgency.
• Iranian Government Formation: An unspecified informed source told IRGC-affiliated media on August 8 that Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has nominated his foreign affairs, defense, and intelligence ministers. Pezeshkian very likely had to receive approval from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei prior to nominating these ministers given the sensitive nature of their positions. The intelligence minister also served under former hardline President Ebrahim Raisi.
• Gaza Strip: The Hamas Khan Younis Brigade is building improvised explosive devices from unexploded ordinance as part of its effort to regenerate forces there. This report is consistent with a June 2024 report from Israeli Army Radio, which is a state-owned news outlet run by the IDF, that said Hamas is establishing small weapons manufacturing sites across the Strip. The manufacture of IEDs on a small scale, however, does not indicate full or large-scale reconstitution of forces to fully supplied or manned levels.

Iran Update, August 7, 2024

Acting Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani defended Iran’s impending retaliatory strike against Israel while signaling that Iran seeks to avoid a regional war during an Organization of Islamic Cooperation meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on August 7.[i] Bagheri Kani argued that Iran “has no choice” but to exercise its right to self-defense and restore deterrence against Israel. This is consistent with CTP-ISW's assessment that Iran is likely planning a retaliatory attack on Israel to restore deterrence after the failed Iranian April 2024 attack while Iran simultaneously tries to avoid a large-scale war with Israel.[ii] Iran and its allies fired around 170 one-way attack drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles at Israel in the April 2024 attack.[iii] The United States, Israel, and their allies intercepted most of the projectiles, and the Iranian attack did significantly less damage than Tehran intended.[iv] Iranian leaders likely calculate that they failed to deter Israel with their April 2024 attack because they did not inflict serious damage.

Iranian armed forces-run media is continuing to publish information that likely aims to decrease Israel’s ability to effectively defend against an Iranian attack by causing Israel to disperse its air- and missile-defense assets. Iranian armed force-run outlet Defa Press argued on August 7 that Iran and the Axis of Resistance should target Israel from multiple directions to disperse Israeli assets, thereby exposing targets.[v] Defa Press claimed that Iran and its Axis of Resistance could increase the volume of munitions targeting specific targets, particularly “sensitive military bases,” to exploit such vulnerabilities. Iran may or may not try to attack any of these targets or others. CTP-ISW assessed on August 4 that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel in response to Israel killing Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran.[vi] Iran’s suggestion that it should target Israel from multiple directions does not, however, validate this August 4 assessment because publicizing relatively specific information like this is likely intended to generate informational effects. The August 7 report is a continuation of previous Iranian reporting covering how Iran will conduct its retaliatory strike. Defa Press published a list of potential Israeli civilian and military targets spread throughout Israel on August 5 which CTP-ISW suggested was likely also meant to cause Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to disperse air- and missile-defense assets across a wide area.[vii] This ongoing information effort probably intends to increase the likelihood that Iran can hit some of its targets, but it is not clear that this effort will be successful. The US-Israeli coalition intercepted most Iranian drones and missiles outside of Israel during the April 13, 2024 attack on Israel.[viii]

The Islamic Resistance in Iraq—a coalition of Iranian-backed Iraqi militias—is expected to conduct “continuous” strikes on US forces in Iraq and Syria “in the coming period” according to an unspecified leader in Harakat Hezbollah al Nujaba cited by Lebanese news outlet al Akhbar on August 7.[ix] The new attack campaign is reportedly in retaliation for Israel’s killing of Haniyeh and senior Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr and to continue Iranian-backed Iraqi militia efforts to expel US forces from Iraq and Syria, according to unspecified sources affiliated with the Islamic Resistance in Iraq. The Islamic Resistance in Iraq’s attack campaign targeting US forces in Iraq and Syria supports Iranian efforts to conduct a retaliatory strike on Israel by attempting to draw US attention and resources away from supporting Israel’s defense. The United States, Israel, and partners in the region collectively intercepted approximately 99% of all munitions launched by Iran during its April 2024 attack.[x]

Unspecified Arab sources cited by the Jerusalem Post on August 6 reported that Pakistan plans to provide Iran with Shaheen-III medium-range ballistic missiles if conflict between Iran and Israel escalates.[xi] The Pakistani Minister of Information and Broadcasting rejected the claim.[xii]

The Axis of Resistance and Iran are coalescing around Yahya Sinwar as Hamas’ new leader. Hamas selected Sinwar, who helped mastermind the October 7 attacks, “by consensus” after “extensive deliberations.”[xiii] Major Palestinian factions issued statements supporting Sinwar’s selection as Hamas’ next Political Bureau leader. Fatah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Palestinian Resistance Committees, and several other groups praised the speed and unity of Sinwar’s selection.[xiv] Lebanese Hezbollah praised Sinwar’s ”unanimous election” and called his selection a “strong message” to Israel and the United States about Hamas‘ unity and its determination to continue ”resistance and jihad.” [xv] Iranian Armed Forces Chief Mohammad Bagheri also praised Sinwar’s selection, adding that it brings ”hope, joy and happiness.”[xvi]

Sinwar’s leadership is very unlikely to change Hamas’ maximalist position on ceasefire and hostage negotiations in the Gaza Strip. Sinwar exercised significant influence within Hamas after October 7 given his command of Hamas’ forces and control of hostages on the ground. Sinwar’s control of the hostages and his command over military forces on the ground as the top Hamas political leader in the Gaza Strip meant that his practical influence outstripped that of Haniyeh, because Sinwar could simply refuse to release the hostages or cease military operations. Sinwar has also retained Khalil al Hayya as lead negotiator in ceasefire talks after assuming leadership of Hamas.[xvii] Hayya has been Sinwar’s deputy in the Gaza Strip since 2017, meaning that the two presumably have a close working relationship.[xviii] Israeli sources have suggested that ceasefire talks are on an indefinite hold and will not resume before Iran retaliates against Israel for Haniyeh’s death.[xix]  US President Biden told Arab mediators that it is urgent to reach a ceasefire “as soon as possible” and that talks have reached a ”final stage.”[xx]

The death of a Houthi drone expert responsible for training Iranian-backed Iraqi militias in the July 30 US strike in Iraq indicates a possible Iranian-backed effort to improve the targeting capabilities of the Iranian-backed Iraqi militias against both US forces and Israel.[xxi] The United States conducted a self-defense strike that killed a senior Houthi commander and drone expert at Kataib Hezbollah’s Jurf al Sakhr facility in Iraq on July 30.[xxii] The Houthis confirmed that the strike killed the commander, who had traveled to Iraq to train other Iranian-backed Iraqi militias in drone tactics.[xxiii] An Iraqi journalist also reported that four other Houthi fighters died in the strike and that all five Houthis were buried in Wadi al Salam in Najaf, Iraq.[xxiv] The Houthis have years of experience conducting successful drone attacks targeting facilities in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates that are protected by US air defense systems, such as the Patriot and THAAD.[xxv] The Houthis more recently have proven that their drones can evade Israeli air defense systems, at least in isolated incidents.[xxvi] This is notable given the relative lack of success Iraqi-backed militias have had in targeting US positions in the region. Houthi instruction may therefore be aimed at improving the success of Iranian-backed Iraqi militia attacks against both the United States and Israel.

The Houthi decision to deploy this commander to Iraq to train Iraqi militias suggests that Iran and the Houthis seek to rapidly accelerate the training of these militias. Iran and the Houthis could have presumably decided to send small numbers of Iraqi militia members to Yemen for training as part of a “train-the-trainer"-style program. The drone expert’s presence in Iraq, however, would have enabled him to train much larger numbers of Iraqi militia members much more rapidly, allowing the knowledge to be disseminated directly without an intermediary trainer. The Iraqi journalist also reported that the Houthis were coordinating with Kataib Hezbollah, Harakat Hezbollah al Nujaba, Ansarallah al Awfiya, and other Iranian-backed militias, which would be consistent with an effort to train larger numbers of fighters and Iraqi militias more efficiently.[xxvii]

Russian officials are continuing coordination with Iran ahead of the Iranian retaliatory strike against Israel out of concern for Russian interests in the region. Reuters reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a message via Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu that Iran should act with restraint and avoiding targeting civilians when retaliating against Israel.[xxviii]  An unspecified Iranian diplomat claimed to IranWire that Russia is opposed to Iranian strikes that could lead to the death of civilians due to the large number of Russian citizens who live in Israel. The report did not make clear how an Iranian official would understand the calculus behind the Russian decision making.[xxix]

Russia is also reportedly assisting Iranian efforts to improve its air defenses against Israeli attacks, according to the New York Times.[xxx] The New York Times, citing two unspecified Iranian officials including an IRGC member, stated that Russia began delivering advanced radars and air-defense systems to Iran.[xxxi] Iranian media has previously reported that Iran sought to acquire Russian air defense systems to improve Iran’s air defense network and defend against Israeli attack, according to the New York Times.

The US Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) highlighted a “notable increase” in Iranian statements on Iran’s ability to product a nuclear weapon, corroborating previous CTP-ISW reporting. ODNI published the 2024 annual report in compliance with the “Nuclear Weapons Capability and Terrorism Monitoring Act of 2022” on July 23.[xxxii] The ODNI assessed that ”Iran probably will consider installing more centrifuges” and increasing its enriched uranium stockpile ”up to 90 percent in response to additional sanctions, attacks, or censure against its nuclear program."[xxxiii] The ODNI also emphasized a ”notable increase” of Iranian officials’ statements on Iran’s nuclear activities, including their ability to produce a nuclear weapon. This corroborates previous CTP-ISW reporting since May, which has noted that senior Iranian officials have normalized public discussions about  Iran’s ability to procure a nuclear weapon.[xxxiv]

Qatari-owned, London-based al Araby al Jadeed reported on August 6 that Jordan expressed concern to Iraq about Iranian-backed Iraqi militias’ presence along the Jordan-Iraq border, citing two Iraqi officials.[xxxv] An unspecified Iraqi Parliament member and Iranian Foreign Ministry official said that Jordan raised concerns to Iraq over the presence of armed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) fighters along Jordan’s eastern border with Iraq’s Anbar Province.  The PMF—an umbrella security organization consisting of many Iranian-backed Iraqi militias—ostensibly reports to the Iraqi prime minister but most of its constituent elements answer to Iran.[xxxvi] A prominent Iranian-backed Iraqi militia within the PMF threatened to create and arm a new 12,000-man Iranian proxy in Jordan on April 1, which CTP-ISW assessed may reflect a greater, more confrontational shift in the Iranian strategy vis-a-vis Jordan. The Iraqi officials also told al Araby al Jadeed that Jordan was worried that Iranian-backed Iraqi militias would “exploit” the PMF’s border deployments to conduct attacks against Israel through Jordanian airspace. Jordan recently indicated that it may shoot down projectiles that enter Jordanian airspace should Iran and the Axis of Resistance launch another attack on Israel.[xxxvii] Jordan shot down Iranian systems that Iran fired at Israel on April 13.[xxxviii] Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said that Jordan ”will not become a battlefield,” however.[xxxix] Jordan’s participation in the April 13 effort to shoot down Iranian drones targeting Israel drew criticism and condemnation from Iran, Palestinian militias, and Iranian-backed proxy groups.[xl]

Key Takeaways:  

• Iranian Retaliation: Acting Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani defended Iran’s impending retaliatory strike against Israel while signaling that Iran seeks to avoid a regional war during an Organization of Islamic Cooperation meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on August 7.
• Hamas Succession: The Axis of Resistance and Iran are coalescing around Yahya Sinwar as Hamas’ new leader. Sinwar’s leadership is very unlikely to change Hamas’ maximalist position on ceasefire and hostage negotiations in the Gaza Strip.
• Houthis in Iraq: The death of a Houthi drone expert responsible for training Iranian-backed Iraqi militias in the July 30 US strike in Iraq indicates a possible Iranian-backed effort to improve the targeting capabilities of the Iranian-backed Iraqi militias against both US forces and Israel. The Houthi decision to deploy this commander to Iraq to train Iraqi militias suggests that Iran and the Houthis seek to rapidly accelerate the training of these militias.
• Russia and Iran: Russian officials are continuing coordination with Iran ahead of the Iranian retaliatory strike against Israel out of concern for Russian interests in the region. Russia is also reportedly assisting Iranian efforts to improve its air defenses against Israeli attacks, according to the New York Times.
• Iranian Nuclear Program: The US Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) highlighted a “notable increase” in Iranian statements on Iran’s ability to product a nuclear weapon, corroborating previous CTP-ISW reporting. CTP-ISW has noted that senior Iranian officials have normalized public discussions about Iran’s ability to procure a nuclear weapon.
• Jordan: Qatari-owned, London-based al Araby al Jadeed reported on August 6 that Jordan expressed concern to Iraq about Iranian-backed Iraqi militias’ presence along the Jordan-Iraq border, citing two Iraqi officials. Jordan is reportedly particularly concerned about the possibility that Iranian-backed Iraqi militias will fire drones and missiles from areas close to the Jordanian border towards Israel.

Iran Update, August 6, 2024

Unspecified US officials told Axios on August 5 that the US intelligence community expects Iran and its Axis of Resistance to conduct two waves of attacks in its retaliation against Israel for the death of Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31.[1] US intelligence officials reportedly briefed a potential scenario to US President Joe Biden and US Vice President Kamala Harris in which Hezbollah would conduct an attack on Israel in a wave separate from another Iranian and Axis attack. Intelligence officials noted that it is not clear whether Iran and the Axis or Hezbollah would launch the first attack. One unspecified US official cited by Axios said that intelligence reports suggest Iranian and Hezbollah planning is a “work in progress.”

Iran and its Axis of Resistance would likely use the first wave of the attack on Israel to assess Israeli air defenses in preparation for the second wave of the attack. The April 2024 attack consisted of only one large volley of drones and missiles fired from Iran.[2] CTP-ISW noted on August 4 that Iran and its allies could use multiple attacks targeting Israel to learn and adjust their attacks as they observe how successful they are.[3] Iran and the Axis could adjust the volume or type of projectiles fired at Israel, targets, and launch locations.

Unspecified US officials cited by the Wall Street Journal on August 5 reported that Iran has begun moving missile launchers and conducting military drills, possibly in preparation for the attack.[4] These drills may be intended to move forces and missile batteries into position for Iran’s retaliatory strike on Israel. Military drills are meant to practice and evaluate prescribed tasks and prepare forces for combat. Military drills may also be used as cover for moving forces and munitions into position for a real military operation. Iran has issued eight “missile, gun, or rocket firing” notices to airmen (NOTAM) since July 31.[5] Two of the NOTAMs cover areas near civilian flight paths in western Iran that Iran would presumably need to clear prior to conducting a retaliatory attack on Israel. These NOTAMs only specify risks up to 12,000ft in altitude, well below the cruising altitude of civilian airliners. These civilian airlines appear to already be avoiding the areas identified by Iranian authorities, however. The decision to avoid these areas is presumably out of an abundance of caution. These two NOTAMs are collectively in effect from August 6 through August 8.[6] US intelligence officials reported that it is unclear when Iran and its Axis of Resistance will conduct retaliatory strikes against Israel according to three unspecified US officials speaking to Axios.[7]

Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah claimed that Hezbollah is fighting to prevent Israel from “eliminating the Palestinian cause,” which obfuscates Hezbollah’s goals and Iran’s theory for destroying the Israeli state.[8] Nasrallah claimed that Hezbollah is fighting to prevent Israel from “winning and eliminating the Palestinian cause.” Hezbollah immediately launched attacks into Israel after October 7 that sought in part to support Hamas’ war effort.[9] Hamas’ war and its ground offensive on October 7 is part of a theory articulated by Iran to destroy the state of Israel by launching successive ground operations.[10] Hezbollah has designed similar ground operations into Israeli territory, such as the ”Conquer the Galilee” plan.[11] The IDF captured this plan in 2012. Hezbollah opposes Israel and seeks to assist Palestinian groups like Hamas in destroying Israel.[12]

Hamas selected Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip and October 7 architect Yahya Sinwar as the next leader of Hamas’ Political Bureau on August 6.[13] Hamas media released an official statement on August 6 announcing Hamas’ selection of Sinwar as the new political leader, replacing Ismail Haniyeh.[14] Sinwar has served as Hamas’ political leader in the Gaza Strip since his election 2017, and he represents some of the most hardline elements within Hamas.[15] Sinwar, together with now-deceased Mohammad Deif and other senior Hamas commanders, planned and executed the October 7 attacks.[16] Sinwar and his immediate circle likely launched these attacks as part of an effort to destroy the Israeli state. Sinwar organized a conference in 2021 that sought to develop plans for Hamas to govern current Israeli territory after Israel’s destruction.[17] Other Palestinian political figures told Israeli outlet Haaretz that Hamas attempted to recruit them as part of this effort, indicating some level of serious planning.

Sinwar has a deep understanding of Israeli society that he intentionally developed during his time in Israeli prison.[18]

Sinwar exercised significant influence within Hamas after October 7 given his command of forces and control of hostages on the ground. He repeatedly resisted pressure to moderate Hamas’ ceasefire position from both his superiors, such as Haniyeh and others, and his military subordinates in the Gaza Strip. There is no indication that Sinwar will moderate this stance after assuming control of Hamas. Sinwar’s control of the hostages and his command over military forces on the ground as the top Hamas political leader in the Gaza Strip meant that his practical influence outstripped that of Haniyeh, because Sinwar could simply refuse to release the hostages or to cease military operations. Sinwar resisted pressure both from his superiors—such as Haniyeh—and his subordinates—such as his military commanders—to agree to a ceasefire.[19] Sinwar has repeatedly expressed confidence in Hamas’ survival as a political and military entity in the Gaza Strip, suggesting that he does not believe a ceasefire is necessary.[20]

Sinwar’s appointment also marks the continued ascendence of pro-Iran elements within Hamas, and it will likely accelerate Hamas’ descent deeper into Iran’s orbit. Sinwar has a substantially stronger relationship with Iran than other top contenders for Hamas’ leadership, such as Khaled Meshaal.[21] Sinwar himself reportedly rejected Meshaal as Hamas’ leader, instead calling for a leader with a “stronger relation with the Iranian leadership.”[22] Meshaal supported the anti-Assad protests in Syria in 2011, causing his relationship with Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah to collapse.[23] Hezbollah officials, for example, refused to meet with Meshaal during Meshaal’s visit to Lebanon in 2021.[24] Sinwar and those with whom he planned the October 7 attacks, including Deif and now-deceased Hamas military wing second-in-command Marwan Issa, maintained a relationship with Iran even after Iran cut its financial aid to Hamas’ political institutions.[25] Meshaal does have better relations with other regional countries, such as Turkey and Qatar, but Hamas’ exiled leadership has reportedly hedged against losing its presence in Qatar by preparing for a move to Iraq.[26]

Iranian-backed Iraqi militia al Thawriyyun claimed responsibility for the rocket attack that injured at least five US personnel at Ain al Assad Airbase in Anbar Province, Iraq, on August 5.[27] This attack marks the third time al Thawriyyun has claimed an attack targeting US forces in Iraq and Syria since July 26.[28] Two Iraqi security sources told Reuters that the militia fired two “Katyusha“ rockets at Ain al Asad.[29] An Iraqi OSINT account reported on August 5 that Iranian-backed Iraqi militias fired 122mm rockets at Ain al Asad.[30] This attack is part of the long-standing Iranian-backed campaign to remove US forces from Iraq. Al Thawriyyun, and the Islamic Resistance in Iraq more broadly, may also seize on the July 30 US self-defense strike in Baghdad and the recent Israeli strikes that killed senior Axis of Resistance leaders to justify renewed attacks against US forces. CTP-ISW previously assessed that Iran could order simultaneous attacks on US forces as part of its retaliatory attack against Israel.[31] Iranian-backed militia attacks targeting US positions could, in some circumstances, pull US attention and resources away from identifying and intercepting projectiles bound for Israel. Iranian leaders may calculate that their projectiles have a higher likelihood of penetrating Israeli air defenses if the United States must focus on defending its own forces.

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation: Unspecified US officials told Axios on August 5 that the US intelligence community expects Iran and its Axis of Resistance to conduct two waves of attacks in its retaliation against Israel for the death of Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31. Iran and its Axis of Resistance would likely use the first wave of the attack on Israel to assess Israeli air defenses in preparation for the second wave of the attack.
• Iranian Attack Preparation: Unspecified US officials cited by the Wall Street Journal on August 5 reported that Iran has begun moving missile launchers and conducting military drills, possibly in preparation for the attack. These drills may be intended to move forces and missile batteries into position for Iran’s retaliatory strike on Israel.
• Nasrallah Speech: Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah claimed that Hezbollah is fighting to prevent Israel from “eliminating the Palestinian cause,” which obfuscates Hezbollah’s goals and Iran’s theory for destroying the Israeli state.
• Hamas Succession: Hamas selected Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip and October 7 architect Yahya Sinwar as the next leader of Hamas’ Political Bureau on August 6. Sinwar exercised significant influence within Hamas after October 7 given his command of forces and control of hostages on the ground. He repeatedly resisted pressure to moderate Hamas’ ceasefire position from both his superiors, such as Haniyeh and others, and his military subordinates in the Gaza Strip. Sinwar’s appointment also marks the continued ascendence of pro-Iran elements within Hamas, and it will likely accelerate Hamas’ descent deeper into Iran’s orbit.
• Iraq: Iranian-backed Iraqi militia al Thawriyyun claimed responsibility for the rocket attack that injured at least five US personnel at Ain al Assad Airbase in Anbar Province, Iraq, on August 5.

Iran Update, August 5, 2024

Iranian armed forces-run Defa Press published a list of potential civilian and military targets in Israel on August 5, which likely aims to decrease Israel’s ability to effectively defend against an Iranian attack by causing Israel to air- and missile-defense assets and creating panic among civilians.[1] The list includes Israeli military bases and government sites like the Israeli Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv, the Israeli Knesset building in Jerusalem, and eight airbases across Israel. Iran also named civil infrastructure sites like airports, gas fields, and power plants throughout the country.[2] Iran may or may not try to attack any of these targets or others. Iran’s decision to explicitly name these targets, which are spread throughout Israel, likely seeks to cause the Israel Defense Forces to disperse air- and missile- defense assets across a wide area.  Iran may calculate that by causing Israel to spread out its defenses, this information effort will increase the likelihood that Iran can hit some of its targets. The US-Israeli coalition intercepted the majority of Iranian drones and missiles outside of Israel during the April 13, 2024 attack on Israel.[3]  Drones and missiles fired from Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria would be much harder to intercept than those launched from Iran given the shorter distances and flight times to Israel.

The target list is not necessarily an indicator of what exact targets Iran will strike in response to Israel’s targeted killing of Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. These targets are not all proportionate with Haniyeh's killing, and publishing some of the targets likely seeks to create informational and economic effects instead of identifying precise targets. Other targets would be significant escalations and seem likely to cause civilian causalities, which Iran would likely calculate is counter-productive to efforts to establish deterrence with Israel.

• Government and major military sites: Iran likely included Israeli centers of government—including the HaKirya, Knesset, and Prime Minister’s Office—in the target list anticipating that Israel would then allocate significant defenses to protect those sites. An Iranian attack on the HaKirya—Israel's equivalent to the Pentagon—would be a substantial escalation on Iran’s part and increase the risk that this retaliatory strike would trigger a major Israeli response that could lead to larger war. A major retaliatory Israeli strike would show that Iran had failed to establish deterrence, which is one of Iran’s very likely goals in responding to Haniyeh’s death. This logic suggests that the inclusion of government and major military sites like the HaKirya is symbolic and informational.
• Economic sites: Iran likely included oil and gas fields, airports, shipping ports, and power plants in the target list to generate both economic and informational effects on Israel. A credible Iranian threat to Ben Gurion Airport and Haifa Port would discourage commercial carriers from servicing the sites. A halt to commerce and flights leaving Israel could both foster anxiety amongst the civilian population and advance Iran's and the Axis of Resistance’s unofficial blockade on Israel. Iran likely understands that an attack on these civilian sites in densely populated areas risks significant civilian casualties and would likely prompt a strong Israeli response. Other targets—such as power plants and oil and gas facilities—are hard to strike in ways that can take them offline for very long, and limited damage to such targets is unlikely to satisfy Iran's aims. An Iranian attack that aimed to take all Israeli powerplants offline could be inspired and informed by Russian targeting in Ukraine, but Iran and its partners and proxies are unlikely to be able to generate similar effects in Israel. Russian attacks on Ukrainian powerplants have caused significant and protracted damage.[4]
• Military sites: Iran likely included Israeli air bases spanning Israeli territory anticipating that Israel would commit additional defenses to the bases, which would limit the IDF’s air defense bandwidth to protect other sites. Iran previously targeted an Israeli airbase in its failed April 2024 attack, making an Iranian targeting of one or several of these bases plausible.[5]

Iran’s identification of targets in Israel does not independently verify CTP-ISW's assessment of a likely Iranian strike because it is more likely intended to achieve informational effects rather than to specify the precise targets to be struck. Iran’s messaging does align with CTP-ISW's assessment that Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel, however.[6] The operation could involve Lebanese Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iranian-backed Iraqi militias conducting coordinated strikes on Israel at the same time as Iranian forces. Hezbollah, the Houthis and Iraqi militias have all expressed an intent to attack Israel.[7] CTP-ISW has observed unconfirmed reports that additional groups, such as Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Palestinian fighters in the West Bank may participate in an Iranian-led attack.[8]

[9]

Israel’s security cabinet is discussing preemptive strikes in response to Iranian messaging detailing its planned attack. These details include the participation of Iranian-backed groups throughout the region, including in Syria, Iraq, and the West Bank. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly discussed possible “preventative actions or attacks” against Axis of Resistance groups planning attacks on Israel with his security cabinet on August 4.[10] CTP-ISW assesses that Iran will likely coordinate its strikes on Israel with simultaneous attacks from several fronts closer to Israel.[11] Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have reportedly transferred advanced missiles to southern Syria from Iraq in recent days.[12] These missiles could be used in Iran’s attack. Hamas and Iran also reportedly directed Palestinian militias in Tulkarm to conduct an infiltration attack into Israel in the immediate future as part of a response to Israel’s killing of Haniyeh.[13] The IDF conducted preemptive strikes in Tulkarm on August 3, which killed nine Palestinian fighters and destroyed the militia cell responsible for planning the infiltration attack.[14]

Western sources and regional notices to airmen (NOTAM) suggest that an Iranian attack on Israel may occur in the next day. The Biden Administration reportedly told members of Congress on August 5 that an Iranian strike may occur as soon as August 5 or 6.[15] US Secretary of State Antony Blinken separately told counterparts at the G7 on August 4 that Iran might begin its attack in the next two to three days.[16] Iranian authorities issued a NOTAM for the center, west, and northwest of the country, warning of likely disruption to GPS and navigational signals.[17] Iran issued a similar warning on April 13 when it conducted its first direct large-scale missile and drone attack on Israel.[18] Jordanian authorities also issued a NOTAM, effective until Tuesday at 22:00 GMT, requesting all airlines in Jordan to carry 45 minutes of reserve fuel for "operational reasons."[19] Iran and the Axis of Resistance have a shrinking window of opportunity to attack Israel before the United States completes the transfer of additional military assets to the Middle East. The United States is reportedly sending a carrier strike group, naval cruisers and destroyers, and a squadron of fighter jets to the Middle East in preparation for an Iranian-led attack on Israel.[20] The arrival of these assets to the region would improve the ability of the United States to respond to an Iranian attack, which Iranian leaders almost certainly recognize.

The IDF has deployed additional forces near Israeli communities adjacent to Tulkarm after receiving a credible threat that Hamas and other Palestinian militias may conduct an October 7-like infiltration operation into Israel from the West Bank.[21] An Israeli military correspondent for Israeli Army Radio reported that the IDF has deployed additional troops from the IDF Home Front Command and the IDF   41st Infantry Battalion to “immediately strengthen” the defense of the Israeli communities in the Sharon Plain, bordering Tulkarm, West Bank. The troop deployment comes after Shin Bet received a warning that Hamas and Iran have directed Palestinian militias in Tulkarm planned to conduct an infiltration attack into Israel in the immediate term in response to a series of Israeli strikes that killed senior Axis of Resistance officials in recent days.[22] The military correspondent claimed that the Shin Bet assessed that there was an ”imminent threat” of an attack, prompting the IDF to conduct preemptive strikes in Tulkarm on August 3, which killed nine Palestinian fighters and destroyed the militia cell responsible for planning the infiltration attack.[23]  The additional troops deployed across the border areas will act as a quick reaction force in the event of an attack into Israel from the West Bank.[24] Unspecified Israeli security officials claimed that Iran and Hamas are trying to draw Israel’s attention to the West Bank and prevent the Israelis from conducting an operation targeting Lebanese Hezbollah in Lebanon.[25]

Iran and Russia are continuing to promote increased cooperation ahead of the Iranian retaliatory strike against Israel. Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu met with various high-ranking Iranian officials in Tehran on August 5.[26] Iranian Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Akbar Ahmadian invited Shoigu to visit Tehran in a phone call in May 2024.[27] Shoigu’s visit may have been prearranged prior to Haniyeh’s death, but senior Iranian and Russian officials would have still needed to deliberately decide to go forward with the visit in the context of the current heightened regional tension. It is notable in this context that Shoigu told Iranian officials that Russia is ready for ”all-around cooperation” with Iran in regional affairs.[28] Official Iranian readouts reported that Shoigu expressed a desire to increase political and economic relations in a meeting with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.[29] Pezeshkian condemned the killing of former Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh. Pezeshkian stated that Iran will ”receive answers” for this crime but that ”[Iran] is not seeking to expand the scope of this crisis in the region.” Shoigu separately met with Armed Forces General Staff Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri. Shoigu and Bagheri discussed increasing bilateral defense and military issues.[30] Shoigu condemned Haniyeh’s killing in Tehran and stated that whoever is responsible aimed to escalate regional tensions.[31]

Shoigu likely also sought to coordinate with Iranian officials ahead of the strike given the implications an Iranian strike launched in part from Lebanon and Syria could have for Russian forces in Syria.[32] Russia has military facilities at Khmeimim, in western Syria and maintains some military police forces in southwestern Syria.[33] Shoigu is expected to hold an additional meeting with Iranian Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Akbar Ahmadian on August 5.[34]

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian met with Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi in Tehran on August 4.[35] Pezeshkian stated that Israel made a ”big mistake” by killing Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31. Safadi stated that the killing of Haniyeh was an attempt by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to ”expand the scope” of regional conflicts. Pezeshkian expressed hope that Jordan and Iran could improve diplomatic relations. Jordan indicated that it may also shoot down projectiles that enter Jordanian airspace, like it did on April 13, should Iran and the Axis of Resistance launch another attack on Israel.[36] Safadi previously stated that Jordan will ”face” anyone who violates Jordanian airspace. Safadi also previously stated that Jordan ”will not become a battlefield.” CTP-ISW previously reported on August 4 that Safadi travelled to Tehran reportedly as part of a last-ditch effort to dissuade Iran from attacking Israel.[37] This marks the first visit of a senior Jordanian official to Iran in 20 years.[38]

US Central Command (CENTCOM) Commander General Michael Kurilla met with Israeli Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Herzi Halevi and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on August 5 to finalize US-Israeli defense coordination ahead of Iran’s and Iranian-backed groups’ attack on Israel.[39] The IDF reported that Kurilla and Halevi discussed joint defense preparations in the region.[40] Israeli media reported that Gallant and Kurilla discussed expanding the international coalition facing ”aggressive activities” from Iran.[41] Kurilla’s visit had reportedly been planned prior to recent regional developments.[42]

Iranian-backed Iraqi militias likely conducted a rocket attack targeting US forces at Ain al Asad Airbase in Anbar Province, Iraq on August 5.[43] The rocket attack reportedly injured several US personnel, according to three US officials speaking to Reuters.[44]  The militias reportedly fired two Iranian-made Arash 122mm rockets that impacted the interior of the base and hit a fuel tank.[45] Iranian-backed Iraqi militias previously targeted Ain al Asad Airbase with multiple rockets on July 26, causing no damage.[46]

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian announced three new appointments in his government on August 4.[47] Pezeshkian announced the appointments of the following positions:

• Senior Adviser: Ali Taib Nia. Taib Nia served as former President Hassan Rouhani’s economic affairs and finance minister between 2013 and 2017.[48] The media gave him the nickname ”Mr. Anti-Inflation,” because inflation improved significantly under his tenure, which coincided with the signing of the JCPOA.[49] Some have criticized Taib Nia for his economic policies and blamed them for economic stagnation and the Iranian market collapse former President Rouhani's second term, however.[50] Taib Nia also held economic related positions in the Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami administrations.[51] Taib Nia served as the management and planning organization deputy in Ahmadinejad's government.[52]

• Planning and Budget Organization (PBO) head: Hamid Pour Mohammadi. Pour Mohammadi served as the PBO deputy and the Central Bank deputy governor in hardline former President Ahmadinejad's government between 2009 and 2013.[53] Local authorities arrested Pour Mohammadi on November 26, 2011, on charges of involvement in a major corruption case but Iranian authorities released Pour Mohammadi on bail a month later. Pour Mohammadi continued his role as Central Bank deputy governor after he was released on bail.[54]

• Vice President for Parliamentary Affairs: Shahram Dabiri. Dabiri worked with Pezeshkian when Pezeshkian was MP for Tabriz and Dabiri was Tabriz City Council chairman.[55] Dabiri is also a medical doctor. Authorities arrested Dabiri and 11 other Tabriz City council members in 2020 on corruption charges related to donations to “legal entities“ and the Tabriz City budget, according to an East Azerbaijan Inspection Organization report.[56]

Pezeshkian met with Vice President for Strategic Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif to discuss the selection for Pezeshkian’s cabinet on August 4.[57] Senior adviser to the IRGC Commander Hossein Taeb stated that Pezeshkian’s government will be ”completely different” from former President Hassan Rouhani’s moderate government.[58] Parliamentary Presidium spokesperson Ali Reza Salimi stated on August 4 that the Pezeshkian administration will submit their proposed cabinet ministers to Parliament “by the end of the week.”[59] Zarif stated   that the President will ”probably” finalize the list by August 10.[60]

Key Takeaways:

• Iranian Retaliation: Iranian armed forces-run Defa Press published a list of potential civilian and military targets in Israel on August 5, which likely aims to decrease Israel’s ability to effectively defend against an Iranian attack by causing Israel to air- and missile-defense assets and creating panic among civilians. These targets are not all proportionate with Haniyeh's killing, and publishing some of the targets likely seeks to create informational and economic effects instead of identifying precise targets. Other targets would be significant escalations and seem likely to cause civilian causalities, which Iran would likely calculate is counter-productive to efforts to establish deterrence with Israel.
• West Bank: The IDF has deployed additional forces near Israeli communities adjacent to Tulkarm after receiving a credible threat that Hamas and other Palestinian militias may conduct an October 7-like infiltration operation into Israel from the West Bank.
• Russia and Iran: Iran and Russia are continuing to promote increased cooperation ahead of the Iranian retaliatory strike against Israel. Russian officials likely seek to coordinate with Iranian officials ahead of the strike given the implications an Iranian strike launched in part from Lebanon and Syria could have for Russian forces in Syria.
• Jordan and Iran: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian met with Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi in Tehran on August 4.
• Iraq: An Iranian-backed Iraqi militia attack targeting US forces at Ain al Asad Airbase in Anbar Province injured multiple US servicemembers.
• Iranian Cabinet Formation: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian announced three new appointments in his government on August 4. These appointments included a former Rouhani economic adviser, a former Central Bank deputy governor during the Ahmadinejad administration, and a former Tabriz MP and Tabriz City Council chairman who has worked previously with Pezeshkian.
• Gaza Strip: The IDF Air Force struck and killed the commander of Hamas’ Sheikh Radwan Battalion in Sheikh Radwan, southern Gaza City, on August 4.

Iran Update, August 4, 2024

Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel in response to Israel killing Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. CTP-ISW previously outlined this scenario as one of the most dangerous courses of action that Iran could pursue.[i] Iranian state media reported on August 4 that Iran and the Axis of Resistance will conduct a “quadrilateral operation” against Israel.[ii] The operation would reportedly involve Lebanese Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iranian-backed Iraqi militias conducting coordinated strikes on Israel at the same time as Iranian forces. Iranian state media added that Hezbollah seeks to attack Israel to retaliate for Israel killing a senior Hezbollah officer in Beirut on July 30, while the Houthis seek to retaliate against Israel for the IDF airstrike on July 20 that hit Houthi military targets in al Hudaydah, Yemen.[iii] The leader of Iranian-backed Iraqi militia Harakat Hezbollah al Nujaba, Akram al Kaabi, published an image on August 4 signaling his intent to participate in an attack on Israel.[iv] Three anonymous US and Israeli officials told Axios on August 4 that Iran and the Axis of Resistance could conduct their coordinate attack as soon as August 5.[v]

Iran and the Axis of Resistance will probably conduct an attack that is more escalatory than the drone and missile attack that Iran conducted against Israel in April 2024. Iran and its allies fired around 170 one-way attack drones, 120 ballistic missiles, and 30 cruise missiles at Israel in the April 2024 attack. Iran designed this strike package of over 300 projectiles to inflict serious damage on Israel and sought to thereby establish deterrence. But the United States, Israel, and their allies intercepted the vast majority of projectiles, so that the Iranian attack did significantly less damage than Tehran intended.[vi]

Iran could modify the April 2024 attack model in at least four ways to increase the likelihood of inflicting serious damage on Israel.

1. Iran could increase the volume of projectiles fired at Israel. Iran could fire more drones and missiles from Iranian territory or instruct its proxy and partner militias across the Middle East to fire more. Drones and missiles fired from Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria would be much harder to intercept than those launched from Iran given the shorter distances and flight times to Israel. US and Israeli forces would have significantly less time than they did in April 2024 to intercept those projectiles.
2. Iran could change the number of locations in Israel that it targets. Iran targeted two remote locations in Israel in the April 2024 attack.[vii] Iran could exploit the short flight times from Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria to concentrate fire on a single target rather than against two. Shorter flight times for drones from Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria could make it easier to coordinate them with ballistic missiles fired from Iran. Tehran could alternatively attack a greater number of targets across Israel.
3. Iran could order simultaneous attacks on US forces, especially in eastern Syria. Iran only targeted Israeli targets in the April 2024 attack. Iranian-backed militia attacks attacking US positions could, in some circumstances, pull American attention and resources away from identifying and intercepting projectiles bound for Israel.[viii] Iranian leaders may calculate that their projectiles have a higher likelihood of penetrating Israeli air defenses if the United States has to focus on defending its own forces.
4. Iran and its allies could conduct a series of drone and missile attacks over several days. The April 2024 attack consisted of only one large volley of drones and missiles fired from Iran. But Iran and its allies could fire multiple volleys over an extended period in the next attack. Stretching attacks over this period could enable Iran and the Axis of Resistance to learn and adjust their attacks as they observe how successful each volley is.

Iran and the Axis of Resistance have a shrinking window of opportunity to attack Israel as the United States moves additional military assets to the Middle East. The United States has decided to send a carrier strike group, naval cruisers and destroyers, and a squadron of fighter jets to the Middle East in preparation for an Iranian-led attack on Israel.[ix] The arrival of these assets to the region would improve the ability of the United States to respond to an Iranian attack, which Iranian leaders almost certainly recognize. Tehran may conclude that it needs to launch an attack before the United States can position and ready its assets in the region in order to maximize how much damage Iran inflicts on Israel.

Iran has dismissed calls from Western and Arab countries to temper its response to Israel killing several senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent days. Iran told unspecified Arab diplomats on August 3 that it does not care if its retaliation triggers a war, according to the Wall Street Journal.[x] This report comes immediately after Iranian Acting Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Bagheri Kani held his multiple phone calls with his Egyptian and Jordanian counterparts, during which he emphasized Iran’s “serious determination to hold [Israel] accountable.”[xi] The Jordanian foreign affairs minister traveled to Iran on August 4 reportedly as part of a “last-ditch effort” to dissuade Iran from attacking Israel.[xii] The Jordanian efforts to prevent an Iranian attack were likely unsuccessful given that Iranian officials have repeatedly emphasized since July 31 the need to retaliate against Israel for killing Haniyeh in Iranian territory.[xiii] An unspecified Iranian source separately told al Jazeera on August 4 that Israel has sent mediators to try to contain the Iranian attack but that Iran has ”ruled out this issue.”[xiv]

Iranian armed forces-run Defa Press called on August 4 for the Axis of Resistance to target “prominent” Israeli leaders in retaliation for Haniyeh’s death.[xv] Martyrs and Veterans Affairs Foundation President Amir Hossein Ghazi Zadeh Hashemi similarly called on August 1 for killing one of Israel’s “main” leaders.[xvi]

Key Takeaways:

• Iran and its Axis of Resistance will most likely conduct a coordinated, large-scale drone and missile attack on Israel in response to Israel killing Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. CTP-ISW previously outlined this scenario as one of the most dangerous courses of action that Iran could pursue.
• Iran could modify the April 2024 attack model in at least four ways to increase the likelihood of inflicting serious damage on Israel. Iran could fire more projectiles at Israel, change the number of locations targeted, or conduct a series of attacks over an extended period. Iran could also order simultaneous attacks on US forces.
• Iran has dismissed calls from Western and Arab countries to temper its response to Israel killing several senior Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent days. Iranian state media and officials have also called for targeting senior Israeli officials as part of the retaliation.

Iran Update, August 3, 2024

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) issued a statement on August 3 claiming that Israel killed Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran using a short-range projectile equipped with an explosive warhead.[1] The statement claimed that the projectile was fired from outside the guesthouse where Haniyeh was staying in northern Tehran. The IRGC also claimed that the projectile was equipped with a “seven-kilogram warhead.” The IRGC vowed to retaliate severely against Israel at the “appropriate time and place” for the killing of Haniyeh.

The statement follows an August 1 New York Times report that stated, citing seven anonymous Middle Eastern officials, that Israel killed Haniyeh by remotely detonating an explosive device covertly smuggled into the Tehran guesthouse months in advance.[2] The report stated that Haniyeh had stayed at that guesthouse multiple times previously. United Kingdom-based outlet the Telegraph similarly reported on August 2 that the Israeli Mossad hired Iranian security agents from the IRGC Ansar ol Mehdi Protection Corps to plant explosives in three separate rooms in the guesthouse.[3] The Telegraph also reported that Israel originally planned to detonate the explosives targeting Haniyeh during former Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s funeral in May 2024. The report stated that this original plan did not go ahead due to large crowds inside the building. The report stated that the agents then fled Iran and detonated the explosive devices from abroad. The IRGC is responsible for securing and maintaining the guesthouse.[4] The IRGC may have claimed that a projectile killed Haniyeh to deflect blame for allowing Mossad to infiltrate its security forces.

The New York Times reported on August 3 that Iran has arrested over twenty-four individuals, including senior intelligence officers, military officers, and staff at the guesthouse, in connection to the security failure that led to the killing of Haniyeh.[5] Israel has not claimed responsibility for killing Haniyeh at the time of this writing.

Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah have refused to speak with US and Arab diplomats trying to deescalate between Israel and Iran, according to the Wall Street Journal on August 3.[6] The Wall Street Journal reported that  the United States and Israel are preparing for an “unpredictable,” broader, and more complex attack than Iran’s April 2024 drone and missile strike on Israel. Iranian officials warned Israel of their plans ahead of the attack in April 2024, providing the United States and Israel with time to prepare. Former White House Middle East director Andrew Tabler told the Wall Street Journal that “less telegraphing means potential to misjudge the next step on the escalatory ladder.” The US Department of Defense announced on August 2 that it will “take steps” to support the defense of Israel and to “mitigate the possibility of regional escalation.”[7] The department also reported that air and sea-based cruise missile defenses, ballistic missile defense-capable cruisers and destroyers, and a squadron of F-22s will deploy to the Middle East. The USS Abraham Lincoln will replace the USS Theodore Roosevelt Carrier Strike Group.[8]

Key Takeaways:

1. Iran: The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) issued a statement on August 3 claiming that Israel killed Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran using a short-range projectile equipped with an explosive warhead. The New York Times reported on August 3 that Iran has arrested over twenty-four individuals, including senior intelligence officers, military officers, and staff at the guesthouse, in connection to the security failure that led to the killing of Haniyeh.
2. Iran and Hezbollah: Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah have refused to speak with US and Arab diplomats trying to deescalate between Israel and Iran, according to the Wall Street Journal on August 3. The Wall Street Journal reported that the United States and Israel are preparing for an “unpredictable,” broader, and more complex attack than Iran’s April 2024 drone and missile strike on Israel.
3. Gaza: The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) struck a Hamas command and control site in Hamama School, Sheikh Radwan, Gaza City on August 3. Hamas used the site to plan attacks on Israeli forces, manufacture and store weapons, and train fighters.
4. West Bank: The IDF killed nine Palestinian fighters, including a Hamas commander in Tulkarm, in two separate airstrikes on August 3.
5. Southern Lebanon and the Golan Heights: Lebanese Hezbollah has conducted at least eight attacks into northern Israel since CTP-ISW's last data cutoff on August 2.
6. Yemen: The United Kingdom Maritime Transit Organization (UKMTO) reported a small explosion in close proximity to merchant vessel M/V Groton around 170 nautical miles east of Aden, Yemen.
7. Syria: The IDF reportedly struck a weapons convoy on August 3 west of Qusayir, Syria on route to the Bekaa Valley, Lebanon.

Iran Update, August 2, 2024

Iran and its Axis of Resistance may target US forces in Syria as part of a retaliatory strike for Israel killing several Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh. Euphrates Post reported that Iranian-backed Iraqi militias Kataib Hezbollah, Sayyida al Shuhada, and Harakat Ansar Allah al Awfiya deployed fighters to eastern Syria on July 31 “with the aim of targeting the International Coalition bases in Hasakah Governorate.[1] Euphrates Post sources in Homs Governorate reported that unspecified Iranian-backed fighter have moved “heavy equipment” and rocket launchers from militia warehouses in Jabal al Mazar into the desert east of Palmyra.[2] Iranian-backed Iraqi militias conducted over 170 attacks targeting US forces in Iraq and Syria between October 2023 and January 2024 including US positions in Hasakah and Homs Governorates[3] Mahshad Friday prayer leader Imam Ahmad al Hoda claimed that US support for Israel emboldened Israel to kill Haniyeh in Tehran and declared that “[Iran] demands blood” from the United States[4]

Iran is very likely taking into consideration US and allied support defending Israel as it considers how to cause greater damage than the April 2024 attack did. Iran and its allies fired around 170 one-way attack drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles at Israel in the April 2024 attack.[5] Iran designed this strike package of over 300 projectiles to inflict serious damage on Israel. The United States and allied forces in the region intercepted a majority of the drones and missiles on route for Israel during Iran’s April 2024 attack.[6] The United States, Israel, and allied countries in the region collectively intercepted approximately 99% of all munitions launched by Iran during its April 2024 attack.[7]

Iranian-backed militia attacks targeting US bases in Syria could pull resources away from engaging and intercepting munitions bound for Israel in some circumstances. If US focus had to orient around defending US ground positions, Iran could calculate that the effectiveness of the integrated regional air defense that defended Israeli territory in April 2024 would be reduced. Tehran might expect that attacks targeting US forces in combination with a large-scale drone and missile attack conducted by the Axis of Resistance could be significantly more effective. Achieving the greatest impact of attacks on US forces to draw resources away from intercepting Iranian strikes against Israel would require a high degree of coordination across the Axis of Resistance and would need to be precisely timed. It is far from clear that Iran and its proxies and partners could coordinate many disparate air and ground operations that finely. US and allied forces can also take many measures to mitigate these risks.

The following indicators would support the hypothesis that Iranian-backed militias are preparing to attack US forces in eastern Syria.

• Iranian-backed militias massing additional forces in or around eastern Syria
• Iranian-backed militias leaving their stations in western Iraq or other parts of Syria
• Iranian or Iranian-backed militia leaders meeting in eastern Syria
• Iranian-backed militias flying ISR drones around US forces in eastern Syria
• Iranian-backed militias in eastern Syria conducting exercises simulating attacks on US forces
• Iranian or Iranian-backed militia leaders in eastern Syria taking heightened security precautions
• Iranian or Iranian-backed sources signaling publicly the possibility of intensified conflict in eastern Syria
• Iranian-backed militias rapidly increasing the dissemination of anti-US disinformation in eastern Syria

CTP-ISW has not independently observed confirmation of any of these indicators, and many of them are unlikely to be observable in the open-source environment.

Iran is likely considering its ability to maintain nuclear deterrence against Israel as it plans its retaliatory strike against Israel. Iranian nuclear deterrence against Israel most likely requires that Iran demonstrate a reasonable ability to strike Israeli territory with a delivery device capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. Iran’s April 2024 attack on Israel demonstrated it is not capable of effectively penetrating Israeli air defenses. The Iranians may shape this attack deliberately to try to establish that they can, indeed, get a nuclear-capable missile to a target in Israel. That course of action would require strike planning to focus on ensuring that the ballistic missiles succeed in hitting at least some of their targets and would not be satisfied if only drones or small missiles penetrated Israeli and partner air and missile defenses.

Anonymous Western intelligence sources told Sky News Arabia that Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah may attack Israel on the Jewish holiday Tisha B’Av on August 12-13 in retaliation for Israel killing Ismail Haniyeh.[8] Tisha B’Av commemorates the destruction of the First and Second Temples and is widely considered a day of sadness and tragedy. An Iranian-Hezbollah attack on this date would come about 12-13 days after Israel killed Haniyeh on July 31. Iran similarly waited 13 days before retaliating against Israel in April 2024 for killing senior IRGC commander Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi.[9]

US and UK officials have engaged Israel to affirm support and coordinate defensive action in preparation for an Iranian-led attack on Israel. US President Joe Biden spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by phone on August 1 and reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to supporting Israeli security.[10] Biden discussed US efforts to support Israel ”against ballistic missiles and drones,” including new defensive US military deployments.[11] US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spoke with Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on August 2 and discussed the United States’ ongoing and future defensive force posture changes in support of Israel.[12] The US Department of Defense announced that Austin had not yet decided which forces to deploy.[13] Israeli officials also engaged with their UK counterparts on August 2. Gallant met with UK Secretary of State for Defense John Healy to discuss creating a coalition of states in Israel’s defense against Iran and Iranian-backed militias.[14] IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi and UK Army Chief of Staff Admiral Tony Radakin conducted a joint assessment and discussed UK-Israeli cooperation in the region.[15]

Ismail Haniyeh was buried in Doha, Qatar, on August 2.[16] Senior Hamas officials, including Khaled Meshaal, attended the funeral ceremony.[17] Meshal is considered to be a top contender to replace Haniyeh as Hamas Political Bureau chairman. Other senior officials attended as well, such as Iranian First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad al Thani, and Turkish Foreign Affairs Minister Hakan Fidan.[18]

Key Takeaways:

• Syria: Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have moved fighters and weapons to eastern Syria in order to attack US forces there, according to local Syrian reports. Iran directing a militia attack on US forces at the same time as an Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel could hinder the US ability to defend Israel.
• Iran: Anonymous Western intelligence sources told Sky News Arabia that Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah may attack Israel on the Jewish holiday Tisha B’Av on August 12-13 in retaliation for Israel killing Ismail Haniyeh.
• Israel: US and UK officials have engaged Israel to affirm support and coordinate defensive action in preparation for an Iranian-led attack on Israel.

Iran Update, August 1, 2024

Iran and the Axis of Resistance are messaging that they will conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack on Israel in retaliation for Israel killing several Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent days. Senior Iranian security officials, including Armed Forces General Staff Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri and Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Akbar Ahmadian, suggested that both Iran and the Axis of Resistance will retaliate against Israel.[1] Iranian leaders met with senior Axis of Resistance officials, many of whom were already in Tehran for the inauguration of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, to coordinate their combined attack.[2] Iranian state media has furthermore suggested that the upcoming Iranian-led attack on Israel would be similar to but greater than the drone and missile attack that Iran launched on Israel in April 2024.[3]

Iran and the Axis of Resistance are almost certainly considering how to cause greater damage to Israel than the April 2024 attack did since that attack failed to impose a serious cost on Israel and thus failed to deter. Iran and its allies fired around 170 one-way attack drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles at Israel in the April 2024 attack.[4] Iran designed this strike package of over 300 projectiles to inflict serious damage on Israel. Iran specifically targeted two remote Israeli targets—an airbase in the southern Israeli desert and an intelligence center in the Golan Heights.[5] Lebanese Hezbollah fired dozens of rockets, while the Houthis launched a few drones and missiles in the April 2024 attack.[6] Iran modeled its attack on Russian strike packages used in Ukraine.[7] Iran has observed how Russian forces have combined drones and missiles in attacks on Ukrainian targets and likely concluded that it could similarly use such a strike package to overwhelm Israeli air defenses and get some projectiles to strike their targets as CTP-ISW has previously assessed.[8]

But the United States, Israel, and their allies intercepted the vast majority of the projectiles, so that the Iranian attack did significantly less damage than Tehran intended.[9] The United States and Israel benefitted from the fact that the Iranian attack drones took hours to fly from Iran to Israel across nearly a thousand kilometers. That hours-long period gave the United States, Israel, and their allies time to prepare their defenses and intercept all the drones as well as many of the subsequent ballistic and cruise missiles. Iranian leaders likely calculate that they failed to deter Israel with their April 2024 attack because they did not inflict serious damage.

Iran is likely now planning for its next attack in order to establish deterrence with Israel while still avoiding a large-scale war. One of the most dangerous but increasingly likely scenarios is that Iran and the Axis of Resistance launch a combined, large-scale drone and missile attack that incorporates lessons from the April 2024 attack. Iranian leaders, in this scenario, could increase the volume of projectiles fired at Israel by launching more from Iran, from the surrounding countries, or both. Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria could launch simultaneous attacks to further strain Israeli air defenses as well. Drones and missiles launched from Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria would be much harder to intercept than the ones from Iran given the shorter distances and flight times to Israel. US and Israeli forces would have significantly less time to intercept those projectiles. It would take Hezbollah drones around 15 minutes to reach Haifa and around 40 minutes flying on direct paths to reach Tel Aviv, for instance (although many drones will likely fly indirect and longer routes).[10] Iran could alternatively exploit the short flight times to concentrate a smaller volume of fire against a single target in Israel rather than against two. Shorter flight times for the drones could make it easier to coordinate them with ballistic missiles fired from Iran, whose flight times are generally less than 10 minutes.  If Iran and its partners and proxies can concentrate drones and missiles on Israeli targets simultaneously, they may have reason to expect that the distractions caused by the one can facilitate penetration by the other.

Iran and the Axis of Resistance will also benefit from the fact that they have probed Israeli air defenses extensively since April 2024 and thus learned how to attack them more effectively. Hezbollah and the Houthis have both conducted attacks that have successfully bypassed Israeli air defenses since April 2024. The most notable example was the Houthi drone attack on Tel Aviv on July 19 that killed an Israeli and injured four others.[11] Israeli air defenses have similarly struggled to intercept Hezbollah drones in recent months because of the short flight time and mountainous terrain.[12] The success that Israel and its allies and partners had in defeating the April 2024 strike should not be cause for complacency in the face of a new attack. But Israel and its supporters have multiple systems to engage various kinds of targets and are aware of the capabilities Hezbollah’s drones have shown, so neither is there cause for pessimism.

Iran could inadvertently trigger an expanded conflict with Israel and even the United States if Iran launches an attack along the lines described here. Launching hundreds of projectiles is inherently risky, particularly given the failure rate that Iranian missiles have shown.[13] Technical errors could cause severe collateral damage, as demonstrated by the recent Hezbollah attack that killed 12 Israeli children in the Golan Heights.[14] This risk is higher given reports that Iran is planning to target locations near Haifa and Tel Aviv.[15] Both cities are far more populated than the two remote locations that Iran targeted in April 2024. The risk of civilian casualties is thus very high even if Iran does not mean to strike civilian targets around Haifa and Tel Aviv. Iran could trigger an expanded war if it kills Israeli civilians or inflicts severe damage—regardless of whether Iran intends to avoid an overt war. It may not be immediately obvious to Israeli leaders that a large strike aimed at one or two targets is not, in fact, aimed at a much wider target set, moreover.  Drones have long ranges and often fly far beyond their targets before turning to hit them from the rear.  The risk of miscalculation in a strike such as the one described is very high.

Some Iranian officials and state media have called for targeting Israeli political and military leaders in response to Haniyeh’s death. Martyrs and Veterans Affairs Foundation President Amir Hossein Ghazi Zadeh Hashemi called on August 1 for killing one of Israel’s “main” leaders.[16] IRGC-affiliated media similarly argued on August 1 that “every [Israeli] political and military official will be a potential target.”[17]

Lebanese Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah warned on August 1 of an "inevitable” retaliation against Israel in response to Israel killing senior Hezbollah official Fuad Shukr.[18] Nasrallah made this remark in a televised speech at a funeral for Shukr.[19] The IDF conducted an airstrike killing Shukr, who was considered Nasrallah’s “right hand man,” in Beirut on July 30.[20] The IDF killed Shukr in response to Hezbollah conducting a rocket attack into the Golan Heights killing 12 Israeli children.[21]

Nasrallah said that Israel did not realize “which lines [it] has crossed” in killing Shukr and announced a new phase of Hezbollah operations on “all support fronts.”[22] Nasrallah suggested that this new phase would include continued attacks into northern Israel.[23] Hezbollah had conducted regular attacks into northern Israel beginning in October 2023 but largely paused these attacks after killing the 12 Israeli children on July 13. Nasrallah said in his speech that these attacks would resume the morning of August 2.[24] Nasrallah also explained that this new phase of escalation will involve an unspecified retaliation for the killing of Shukr.[25] Nasrallah claimed that the Israeli airstrike that killed Shukr also killed five Lebanese civilians.[26] This framing is especially noteworthy given that Nasrallah threatened on July 17 to attack civilian targets deep in Israel if Israeli airstrikes kill Lebanese civilians.

The Israeli airstrike targeting Fuad Shukr in Beirut on July 30 also killed an Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force officer, Milad Beydi.[27] IRGC Commander Major General Hossein Salami released a statement mourning the killing of Beydi and blaming Israel for his death.[28]  Salami described Beydi as one of the Iranian military advisers in Lebanon and Syria.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed that it killed Hamas’ top military commander, Mohammad Deif, in an airstrike in the al Mawasi humanitarian zone on July 13.[29] The IDF confirmed that the airstrike killed Deif in a statement on August 1.[30] An Israeli military correspondent reported that the IDF received definitive intelligence that confirmed Deif’s death in the hours prior to the announcement.[31] The al Qassem Brigades—Hamas‘ military wing—has not released a statement acknowledging the IDF statement as of this writing.

Key Takeaways:

• Iran: Iran and the Axis of Resistance are messaging that they will conduct a coordinated, large-scale attack on Israel in retaliation for Israel killing several Axis of Resistance leaders, including Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh, in recent days.
• Iran is likely now planning for its next attack to establish deterrence with Israel while still avoiding a large-scale war. One of the most dangerous but increasingly likely scenarios is that Iran and the Axis of Resistance launch a combined, large-scale drone and missile attack.
• Lebanon: Lebanese Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah warned of an "inevitable” retaliation against Israel in response to Israel killing senior Hezbollah official Fuad Shukr.
• Gaza Strip: The IDF confirmed that it killed Hamas’ top military commander, Mohammad Deif, in an airstrike in the al Mawasi humanitarian zone.