Last week, Israeli jets struck Iranian arms warehouses in northwestern Syria. The Syrian military responded—after the jets were already out of range—with antiaircraft missiles, one of which brought down a Russian surveillance plane, killing fifteen crew members. After initially blaming Israel for the fiasco, Moscow struck a more conciliatory tone, but only temporarily. It has now pledged to provide the Syrian army with its S-300 surface-to-air missile system, which could make it more difficult for the IDF to operate over Syria’s skies. And there has also been some all-too-familiar rhetoric on the part of Russian politicians and media outlets, as Ariel Bolstein notes:

The false accusation against Israel has awakened the ghosts of anti-Semitism that always existed in Russian society and which the ruling powers have made an effort to hide in recent decades. Russian television stations are permitting themselves to make harsh statements about Israel and a number of speakers, including senior delegates in the Russian parliament, have demanded that military air bases in the Jewish state be bombed in retribution. Until last week’s incident, such remarks were effectively prohibited in public in Russia, because officials were certain that the person at the top—President Vladimir Putin—objected to them.

But the new situation in which a major government entity in the form of the Russian Defense Ministry talks about Israel in language reminiscent of the cold war has unleashed anti-Semitic language in Russia in general.

The Russians’ unwillingness to accept the facts, along with their desire to insist that Israel is responsible, demonstrate that they intend to use the incident to squeeze out the diplomatic maximum in Syria. They will try to limit Israel’s operational freedom, albeit without getting dragged into a direct conflict. The manufactured crisis over the shot-down plane will be used as an excuse to bestow advanced military capabilities on the Syrian regime, such as the S-300 missile system.

In a situation like this, it is important that Israel stand its ground and keep operating as it did before the incident: on the one hand maintaining close contact with Russia about diplomatic and military matters, especially at the highest levels, while on the other hand allowing the IDF to operate in Syria as needed. When Moscow realizes that Israel will not capitulate, the understandings that were in place before the incident will remain in effect.

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.