Iran's 'axis of resistance' is being tested, and Iran faces the difficult choice of responding to Haniyeh's killing without instigating a reprisal on Iranian soil, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.
The Wall Street Journal also added that the different Iranian proxies in Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria have conflicting interests, which impacts Iran's overall strategy.
The Wall Street Journal claimed that a regional war would particularly affect Hezbollah, while Syria has said they do not wish to be involved in a potential future conflict, according to a Syrian government adviser and a European security official.
However, proxy militias in Iraq and Yemen are apparently keen to take the aggressive approach, WSJ reported, not just against Israel but also US bases in the area.
Yemen’s Houthis reportedly want to carry out massive strikes on US warships and Israeli ports, not just in revenge for the assassination of Haniyeh but also for the strikes on Hodeidah, according to Houthi and European officials.
“The Houthis are very reckless and ambitious,” said Osamah Al Rawhani, a director for the Yemen-focused Sana’a Center for Strategic Studies.
"They are emboldened by the fact they are in full control of their territory and sit in a strategic location that has been causing harm to the global trade through their hostilities against the shipping routes.”
Andrew Tabler, the former Middle East director of the US National Security Council, compared Iran to “a chariot drawn by a band of unruly horses."
“Iran is holding the reins, but its allies often disagree on the pace and direction of travel, and that could lead to crashes.”
Iran's doctrine
Iran has so far fought mainly via proxies rather than direct conflict.
"Iran’s doctrine is premised on pushing insecurity away from its borders, aiming for violence to remain contained, bleeding out its adversaries but avoiding all-out war,” an Iran-focused professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa, Thomas Juneau, told WSJ.
Citing the US's DIA, the report stated that the majority of Iran's air-defense systems were purchased in the 1970s before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. As Tehran concentrated on equipping its soldiers and using missiles over air defenses, the report says it is not prepared to defend its airspace.
Douglas Barrie, a senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said that “most of [Iran’s] combat aircraft and their weapons are obsolescent.”
"Given the large area of the country, providing complete air defense of all potential targets isn’t possible.”
Therefore, Iran's intention to respond to Israel is more complicated in practice, the report stated.
“Israel has called Iran’s bluff now multiple times this summer, and Israel has demonstrated escalation dominance—the ability to credibly out-threaten Iran and Hezbollah,” said Michael Knights, co-founder of the Militia Spotlight research platform.
“Iran will have to demonstrate a new level of effectiveness or precision.”