Analysis: Can both sides declare victory in Iran-Israel clash?

Critics, on the other hand, said that the fact almost all the ordnance was shot down — or never even made it out of Iranian airspace — proved the inferiority of Iran’s arsenal, and that in any case the whole matter was a charade that left Iran looking like the lion that squeaked.

Some analysts said Iran had to know its hundreds of missiles were going to get intercepted and was being careful not to exact too much damage to temper Israeli response. Iran also does not want a broader war, one that would suck in the United States.

But the administration official who briefed reporters Sunday cast doubt on such a calculation. Iran “clearly intended to inflict significant damage and death,” the official said. Israel reported some damage at an air force base and the wounding of a Bedouin child.

Throwing so much of its best materiel at Israel with so little physical impact could be an embarrassing setback for Iran.

On Monday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Naser Kananí described the attack as “necessary, proportional, and aimed at military targets” to establish “deterrence capability,” according to news agency reports from Tehran. Kanani added that Iran “does not seek to escalate tensions in the region.”

At the same time, Iran has warned that if any country assisted Israel in a counteroffensive, there would be consequences.

On Sunday, an unnamed military source was quoted in Iran state news criticizing Jordan for its “movements during the punitive attacks” and saying that backing Israel would make it “the next target.”

That same day, the Jordanian foreign ministry called in the Iranian ambassador and upbraided him for “getting involved in Jordan’s internal affairs” and for “casting doubt on Jordan’s positions” on Israel, Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said in an interview with Al-Mamlaka TV.

“Iran’s problem is with Israel and not with Jordan,” he said. “Neither Iran nor anyone else can outbid what Jordan is doing, what it is offering, and what it has provided historically for the sake of Palestine.”

Jordan billed the shoot-downs as as a military intervention meant to preserve national sovereignty and the safety of the country’s citizens. Safadi said that Jordan would have done the same if the missiles were fired by Israel toward Iran.

Complicating matters for Jordan’s government, the events of the weekend only added to the anger of many citizens who oppose diplomatic relations with Israel because of its conduct in the war in Gaza. Many Jordanians have Palestinian roots, and activists online have been mocking what they view as their government’s willingness to defend Israelis while letting Palestinians die.

Now the world waits to see whether Israel will be content with having repelled the attack by Iran — or if it will respond militarily.

Jonathan Spyer, research directer at the U.S.-based Middle East Forum, suggested that Israel might be propelled to act because it cannot allow Iran, or the region, to regard retaliatory attacks on Israeli territory as a new normal.

Israel won’t want to “take the win,” as it’s being urged to do by the U.S. and others, he said. “From the Israeli perspective, a ‘win’ is not blocking the blow, but what you do after the blow.”

Wilkinson reported from Washington and Bulos from Beirut.