Calls between Israeli foreign ministers and  the longtime Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó have typically been pleasant affairs in recent years, due to the close ties between Jerusalem and Budapest, but Szijjártó had a different kind of message to relay to Israel Katz on Monday night — a message from Tehran.

Acting Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri told his Hungarian counterpart that Iran is determined to attack Israel, and Szijjártó informed Katz, who then called on the EU to “exact a heavy price from Iran for any act of aggression.” 

The phone chain from Tehran to Jerusalem came as part of a broader effort by the Islamic republic to shore up diplomatic support, or at the very least justify the attack that experts believe is likely to come.

Russian Security Council President Sergei Shoigu was in Tehran on Monday, pledging “full cooperation with Iran on regional issues,” while Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi made a rare visit to Tehran earlier this week. Iran asked for a meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, to be held in Jeddah on Wednesday. Bagheri called all foreign ambassadors stationed in his country on Monday “to explain the views of the Islamic Republic of Iran on the Zionist regime’s terrorist attack that martyred Ismail Haniyeh, head of … Hamas in Tehran,” according to an Iranian Foreign Ministry statement. Israel has not taken responsibility for the assassination. 

Iran is “trying to get diplomatic legitimacy for their upcoming attack against the State of Israel,” Meir Javedanfar, a lecturer on Iranian politics at Reichman University, said. “It’s very much in line with the new reformist administration, which believes Iran should also use its diplomatic capabilities and muscle in order to enhance the effectiveness of its military arm [and] make its attack against Israel even more powerful.”

To do this, Iran is “engaging as many countries as possible, especially some countries in Europe,” Javedanfar said.

Ben Sabti, a researcher at the Iran program at the Institute for National Security Studies, said that Iran’s message is one of “justice and blood revenge,” and that the sense of respect and dignity it gets from such diplomatic engagement is important to Tehran.

Monday “was a very unusual day,” Sabti said. “I don’t remember a day with so many people coming and going. Iran was like France all of a sudden; everyone was talking to them.” 

Meanwhile, Iran’s proxies remained on the attack, with a rocket attack on a U.S. military base in Iraq that Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin called “a dangerous escalation” and linked to Hezbollah’s ongoing assaults on Israel’s north.

But a direct Iranian attack on Israel is almost certain to take place despite any diplomatic efforts to deter Tehran, Danny Citrinowicz, a research fellow in the INSS Iran Program and the former head of the Iran branch in Israeli defense intelligence, told Jewish Insider.

“Iran’s basic approach is that if they don’t respond, then it’ll be worse next time. Today it’s Haniyeh, tomorrow it’s Khamenei,” he said. “It’s a question of how they’ll respond.” 

As for the timing, Citrinowicz said that Iran is “waiting for the time and way that is best for them.”

Citrinowicz argued that by drawing out the prelude to its attack, Iran is already causing psychological damage to Israelis, citing foreign airlines canceling their flights and “minor hysteria” among some of the population.

Sabti, however, said that the fact that Iran is taking its time means it has lost the element of surprise and allows Israel to prepare.

Iranian media across the board is “threatening revenge and a harsh punishment for Israel so that such cases [as Haniyeh’s assassination] do not occur again,” Sabti said. “They took it very badly that it happened at the heart of the regime,” in Tehran.

Sabti said that “in past cases, the Iranians would get angry, let off steam, and then the response would not be like they promised … They’re talking like they want to bring the end of the world, but it won’t be as bad.” Yet Sabti was certain that there would be an attack of some kind.

On April 14, Iran launched its first-ever direct military attack on Israel, shooting some 300 drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles at the Jewish State, the vast majority of which were shot down by the Israeli military and a coalition led by the U.S. that also included regional allies, such as Jordan.

Citrinowicz said the upcoming attack would likely be limited, saying that, “like in the April 14 attack, they need to draw a line in the sand without sparking a war, while knowing that it can deteriorate into one … Looking at the Iranian leadership, one understands that there will be a reaction, but the goal is something that will be contained.” 

At the same time, he said, if the upcoming strike is “anything less than [the April attack], Iran will look like they’re deterred.” 

Sabti pointed out that it is unlikely that Iran has developed new, more advanced weapons since the April 14 attack, and Tehran knows that Israel’s partners are coming together again in its defense such that the difference this time may be the choice of targets.

“I believe that [the attack] will be about the same,” Sabti said. “Maybe they will try to strike a big city like Beersheba. It’s hard for me to believe that they will try to aim at the Tel Aviv area because that will start a world war … It’s hard for me to believe they would attack Jerusalem for religious reasons, they could hit Al-Aqsa … But they could hit areas like Hadera, Ashdod, power stations, ports.” 

An attack on an Israeli port would dovetail with frustration expressed in the Iranian media that Israel’s economy is still relatively strong despite the war and Houthi attacks blocking the Red Sea, Sabti said.

The upcoming strike will also be different from the one in April because of Iran’s “synchronization with the axis of resistance,” Citrinowicz said, referring to Hezbollah’s involvement this time, following Israel’s killing of its senior official Fuad Shukr last week.

Citrinowicz warned that even if neither Iran nor Israel – nor the U.S. – wants a regional war, they are closer to one than ever since the killings of Shukr and Haniyeh.

“This needs to be handled very delicately, with the involvement of the U.S., to prevent a regional war,” he said.