Tehran views the attack as equivalent to an attack on its own territory, so a direct response on Israeli soil by Iran itself is a serious possibility
Countries including India, France, Poland and Russia have warned their citizens against travel to the region, already on edge over the war in Gaza ⠀
“The revenge will come,” wrote Israel’s largest daily newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth. “For the moment, the premise is that it will be very soon, in the next few days.” ⠀
“It’s going to be very difficult for Iran not to retaliate,” said Raz Zimmt, senior researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies.
“I still believe that Iran doesn’t want to engage in full-scale, direct military confrontation against Israel, and certainly not with the United States. But it has to do something.” ⠀
Iranian sources and diplomats from the United States, Israel’s main protector, say Tehran has signalled to Washington that it wishes to avoid escalation and will not act hastily.
But the risk remains that any response might spin out of control. ⠀
Iran has missiles capable of hitting Israel directly and in recent weeks, Israel has bolstered its air defences, which have intercepted thousands of rockets fired by Hamas from Gaza and by Hezbollah from Lebanon.
I get that the paper is trying to thread carefully. But Iran doesn’t just “view” the attack as equivalent to an attack on its own territory. Internat law does.
Internet law?
Lol nice, yeah international law, obviously. I’m leaving it!
I’m curious about that.
Could you point to the law, section and paragraph saying that? That’s a good argument for me to use in conversations
This blog says that an embassy is the property of the sending nation, and enjoys diplomatic immunity, but that it is still part of the host’s territory. They cite articles 21-25 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.