Israel’s response ‘depends on damage on the ground’ says UK military expert

We’re joined by Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute.

Krishnan Guru-Murthy: Where do you think this is all going?

Matthew Savill: I’m not sure I can give you much optimism or confidence at the moment. I think an awful lot depends on the damage and the casualties on the ground. And of course, that is still being assessed. It’s inconceivable given an attack of this scale that there won’t be some kind of Israeli response. But if it turns out that the majority of these missiles were intercepted or fell in open ground or essentially just hit buildings, you might see something that was demonstrative of Israel’s conventional superiority, as we did earlier in the year. If there are significant casualties, though, in truth, all bets are off, because I think the Israelis are feeling pretty confident in their capabilities at the moment. And the truth is they have a significant overmatch of Iran’s conventional military.

Krishnan Guru-Murthy: And is Israel capable militarily of waging war in Gaza, Lebanon, Iran, Syria and the Red Sea and the Houthis? At the same time?

Matthew Savill: A fair question. And of course, that was supposed to be the deterrent value offered by the so-called axis of resistance, which is that they prevented or at least forestalled a direct Israeli attack on Iran because they would be too busy dealing with or at least concerned about threats closer to home. Hamas has been nearly militarily defeated. Doesn’t mean it’s gone. Hezbollah appears to be at the moment, lacking in leadership and uncoordinated. And I think it’s notable that there don’t appear to have been lots of drones or rockets launched from there as part of this attack. And so there might be voices within the Israeli system who are arguing that now is an opportunity to make a significant strike on Iranian military, industrial or infrastructure targets or the nuclear programme.

Krishnan Guru-Murthy: And bluntly, does Britain matter in this? Or is it just seen as an adjunct to the United States?

Matthew Savill: The truth is that the UK has interests in the region. But in terms of influence, no, not really. Obviously, it has some military capabilities in the region. We’ve yet to hear the extent to which they’ve been affected or were involved. But if you’re looking at a situation where Israel is fundamentally dealing with what it regards as an existential problem and even the US is struggling or not inclined at the moment to use its leverage, it’s difficult to see how the UK could really make much difference.