Professor Pillar: Iran likely won't retaliate against Israel

Professor Paul Pillar says, “That the Iranian government has initially reacted to the attack by downplaying its impact gives reason for hope that Iran will not keep the violent tit-for-tat going with another round of attacks.”

News ID: 5319

Date: 27 October 2024 - 10:00

TABNAK– Professor Paul Pillar, who was CIA intelligence analyst for 28 years, says "That the Iranian government has initially reacted to the attack by downplaying its impact gives reason for hope that Iran will not keep the violent tit-for-tat going with another round of attacks.”

“However, the broader confrontation between Israel and Iran is by no means over,” Pillar told Tabnak News Agency.

Following is the full text of the interview.

Q: Israel violated Iran's territorial integrity in attacks. Various countries, including Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, have considered this attack a clear violation of Iran's sovereignty. Accordingly, can this attack be considered an example of aggression under the UN Charter?

A: With the type of tit-for-tat exchanges that had already been going on between Israel and Iran, a clear concept of aggression, per the UN Charter, becomes difficult to apply.  Of course, this most recent Israeli attack is a use of military force that violates another nation's territorial integrity, and in that sense can be labeled aggression.  Israel would say the same thing about the Iranian missile attack on Israel at the beginning of October.  That is how such tit-for-tats work.  Each side describes the actions of the other side as aggression, and its own actions as retaliation.  It is reasonable to discuss how and why such a chain began, and who was initially most in the wrong, but that begins to get far removed from discussions of aggression as mentioned in the UN Charter.

Q: According to Article 51 of the UN Charter, Iran will have the right to self-defense. In this regard, what actions can Iran take in the UN or individually?

A: The most important issues right now involve what actions it would or would not be wise for Iran to take rather than what it has a right to take.  What is right may not be wise.  Iran has a right to respond militarily to an attack on its territory as part of a right to self-defense.  However, defense has to be exactly that, and not offense.  What Israel has done in the Gaza Strip is an example of operations that go far beyond anything that can be construed as defense (or as a justified response to the Hamas attack on Israel).

Q: According to the news, some countries have participated in this Israeli aggression. In this regard, what actions can Iran take under the UN Charter?

A: I am not aware of any involvement of other countries in this attack that would rise to the level of justifying a military response.  Iran can respond to any more indirect involvement by other countries with diplomacy and by arguing its case in UN fora.

Q: In your opinion, the war between Iran and Israel end at this stage?

A: That the Iranian government has initially reacted to the attack by downplaying its impact gives reason for hope that Iran will not keep the violent tit-for-tat going with another round of attacks.   However, the broader confrontation between Israel and Iran is by no means over.  Israel and especially Netanyahu have motivations for continuing Israel's wars.  This includes the continued devastating offensives in both the Gaza Strip and Lebanon.  These offensives may lead to more Israeli actions such as the killings of Haniyeh and Nasrallah, which led to the Iranian missile attack on Israel in October and in turn led to the most recent Israeli attack on Iran.