REVEALED: How Israel used swarm of drones to confuse Iranian air defences before ‘firing supersonic Rampage missile’ from fighter jet to take out radar station in precision attack that silenced Tehran’s mullahs

Israel’s retaliatory strike against Iran last week appears to have tempered Tehran’s rhetoric, at least for now.

The surgical strike, which came in response to Iran launching some 320 missiles and drones at targets in Israel on April 13, is believed to have damaged the radar systems of an air defense battery at an air base near the central city of Isfahan.

Initial reports about the strike were murky and neither side was willing to share details of what happened.

Iranian army commander Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi said air defense systems shot down “suspicious objects that did not cause any damage,” while Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian described them as “more like toys with which our children play”.

But Israeli media claimed this morning that the Israeli Air Force (IAF) attacked Iranian targets with ‘Rampage’ air-to-ground missiles, launched from fighter jets hundreds of miles west of Iranian airspace.

These precision supersonic missiles are equipped with anti-jamming technology to thwart electronic countermeasures and are designed to penetrate heavily protected targets such as military installations and bunkers.

Meanwhile, quadcopter drones were used to confuse and distract Tehran’s air defense systems, increasing the effectiveness of missile attacks.

Satellite images revealed by Umbra Space, Skywatch and Planet Labs appeared to show debris covering the radar system site at the airfield.

The S-300 air defense batteries that use the radar system to track incoming threats and that were present at the time of the attack were later removed, suggesting that they had also been damaged.

The targeted and measured nature of the attack was reportedly decided after Israeli officials abandoned plans for a broader attack similar to the one launched by Tehran on April 13.

After consulting with its allies, the IAF opted for a limited strike that avoided significant damage but still demonstrated to the Islamic Republic’s leaders Tel Aviv’s ability and willingness to trade blows, according to Israeli officials cited by the New York Times – an evaluation that agrees with the conclusions of many analysts.

Andrew Borene, chief executive of threat intelligence firm Flashpoint, told MailOnline: “Israel’s kinetic attacks on Iranian territory could have been aimed at demonstrating a determination on Israel’s part to engage with Iran in a tit-for-tat, possibly as a limited solution. Demonstration that Israeli precision strike technology can get to the heart of Iran’s most sensitive military programs.

Other analysts said the minimal impact of the IAF attack on Isfahan allows Iran to escape further escalation.

‘If this is the extent of Israel’s retaliation, it could be described as a de-escalation attack. The use of small drones as quadcopters provides a degree of plausible deniability that helps Iran downplay the effect of the attack,” Dr Andreas Krieg, senior lecturer at the School of Security Studies at King’s College London, told MailOnline.

He added: “The Iranians would have to respond to an attack that cannot be denied or that would involve Israeli aircraft over Iran, but this attack does not cross the threshold.” Neither side wants an all-out war.”

In fact, the attack appears to have done just that: Iranian officials have made no mention of possible Israeli involvement, while Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei noted how little damage was sustained to Israeli targets during the April 13 attack.

‘How many missiles were launched and how many hit their target is not the main question.

“What really matters is that Iran demonstrated its willpower during that operation,” he said.

But Dr. Kreig added that Netanyahu, whose popularity has plummeted in Israel with dozens of hostages still held captive in Gaza after six months of war with Hamas, could try to foment tension with Iran to maintain his own security at the head of the government. .

“I think Netanyahu is better off with a protracted but manageable conflict. That can be achieved by expanding the conflict with Iran’s Axis of Resistance. “This is a low-risk conflict that keeps Israel on high alert without the risk of becoming existential,” he said.

‘Israel could decide to launch a series of attacks spread over time that are individually so insignificant that Iran does not have to respond… a “death by a thousand cuts” strategy, which is difficult to deter.’

As such, it is too early to say whether tensions are truly cooling or whether Tehran and Tel Aviv are simply entering a brief respite from which new conflicts could emerge.

Meanwhile, Noam Ostfeld, a defense analyst at global risk analysis firm Sibylline, said the exchange of attacks has changed the rules of engagement between Iran and Israel, making future attacks and dangerous escalation a much stronger prospect. .

‘In the long term, although we still think that further direct attacks against Iran are unlikely, there is a realistic possibility that this latest exchange has created a new basis for acceptable levels of engagement.

“Iran may seek other indirect ways to retaliate against Israel (such as ship hijackings) and Israel could carry out limited attacks that can be plausibly denied or do not require escalation.”

Justin Crump, British Army veteran and CEO of Sibylline, added: ‘It remains to be seen whether this is the beginning of a more concerted campaign by Israel to harm Iran while still reaching an escalation threshold, or an isolated act.

‘Iran has its own internal problems with spiraling inflation and anti-regime sentiment and is so far keen to keep things from escalating.

“However, this cannot really be a return to normality and would suggest that honor is far from satisfied on both sides at this time.”

While he said the Israeli strikes “may give the illusion that we have threaded the needle of the crisis,” Crump emphasized that “the base level of alert across the region will be heightened for an extended period.”