UAE 공군의 미라지2000이 이란 라반 섬의 정유시설을 공습?

[위종민]

이란 라반섬의 정유시설을 UAE 공군의 미라지 2000이 공습했다는 소문이 있네요. 소문이 사실이면 서서히 국제전으로 비화해 가는 건지... 

이란 라반섬 정유소 공격에 UAE 미라주-2000-9 전투기 지목, 호르무즈 해협 휴전 붕괴 위기 - Defence Security Asia

이란 라반섬 정유소 공격에 UAE 미라주-2000-9 전투기 지목, 호르무즈 해협 휴전 붕괴 위기
UAE가 운용하는 미라주-2000-9 전투기가 라반섬 정유소를 공격했다는 확인되지 않은 이란 측 주장이 나오면서 페르시아만 전역으로의 갈등 확산 우려가 커졌으며, 호르무즈 해협과 세계 석유 시장, 그리고 미국의 중재로 맺어진 취약한 휴전이 즉각적인 압박을 받게 되었습니다.

영어 | 기타 | 국제
작성자: admin
2026년 4월 9일

공유

(DEFENCE SECURITY ASIA) — 이란 라반섬 정유소에 대한 공격은 워싱턴과 테헤란이 직접적인 적대 행위를 중단한 이후 페르시아만 내에서 발생한 가장 위험한 에스컬레이션으로 변하며 2주간의 취약한 휴전 상태를 뒤흔들었습니다.
이란 군 관련 소식통들은 이번 정유소 타격이 아랍에미리트(UAE)가 운용하는 미라주-2000-9 전투기에 의해 수행되었다고 주장했으며, 이는 위기를 기존의 미국-이란 대립 너머로 즉각 확대시켰습니다.
라반섬은 호르무즈 해협 인근에 위치하며 하루 약 55,000배럴의 석유를 처리하기 때문에, 이번 공격은 제한적인 물리적 파괴 이상의 의미를 가집니다.

UAE 미라주 전투기

이란 관리들은 이번 타격을 "적의 공격"이자 "비겁한 공격"이라고 묘사했으며, 관영 언론들은 에미리트의 미라주-2000-9 항공기와 윙룽-2 무장 드론이 연루되었다는 의혹을 빠르게 유포했습니다.

미국은 외교 채널을 통해 테헤란 측에 이번 작전이 워싱턴이나 이스라엘 중 어느 쪽과도 연관이 없음을 알린 것으로 전해졌으며, 이는 또 다른 지역 행위자가 독자적으로 개입했을 수 있다는 즉각적인 의구심을 불러일으켰습니다.
이스라엘은 개입 사실을 공개적으로 부인했으며, 나다브 쇼샤니 중령은 이스라엘군이 이번 타격과 무관하다고 밝혀 실제 가해자가 누구인지에 대한 불확실성을 더욱 심화시켰습니다.
공식적인 부인과 확인되지 않은 비난, 그리고 이란의 신속한 보복이 결합되면서, 이제는 확인된 군사적 사실만큼이나 인식이 중요하게 작용하는 전략적 환경이 조성되었습니다.

만약 테헤란이 아랍에미리트가 이란의 핵심 에너지 기반 시설을 직접 겨냥했다고 최종 결론을 내린다면, 걸프 지역의 억제 역학은 은밀한 대결에서 공개적인 국가 간 분쟁으로 전환될 수 있습니다.
마찬가지로 중요한 점은, 이번 사건이 호르무즈 해협 인근에서 발생할 경우 상대적으로 작은 에너지 시설에 대한 제한적인 공격도 어떻게 불균형적으로 큰 지정학적 결과를 초래할 수 있는지를 보여준다는 것입니다.

UAE 미라주-2000-9 항공기의 연루 의혹을 확인해 주는 독립적인 증거는 아직 제시되지 않았으며, 이는 지역 내 갈등 고조를 부추기는 핵심 주장이 검증된 것이라기보다 추측에 근거하고 있음을 의미합니다.
이러한 불확실성은 에스컬레이션의 위험을 크게 높이는데, 군사 기획자들이 독립적으로 확립된 작전 증거보다는 가설, 가로챈 소문, 그리고 정치적으로 편리한 서술에 반응하기 시작할 수 있기 때문입니다.

그 결과로 나타난 불신 가득한 분위기는 호르무즈 해협 인근에서 발생하는 모든 폭발, 레이더 접촉, 항공기 움직임을 점점 더 불안정한 지역 위기 주기에 가두게 될 위협이 되고 있습니다.
읽어보기: 이란, 시라즈 상공에서 사우디-UAE 윙룽 II 격추, 이란 영공 내 첫 직접적인 걸프 드론 작전 폭로

왜 라반섬이 전략적 목표가 되었는가
라반섬은 정유소와 수출 시설이 호르무즈 해협 인근의 이란 원유 생산을 지원하고 있어 페르시아만 내에서 전략적으로 민감한 위치를 차지하고 있습니다.
비록 해당 정유소의 처리 용량은 하루 약 55,000배럴에 불과하지만, 해상 기반 시설과의 근접성으로 인해 이란의 광범위한 석유 물류 네트워크 내에서 불균형적인 가치를 지닙니다.

따라서 라반섬에서 발생하는 모든 혼란은 정유소 생산량뿐만 아니라 해상 수출 일정, 유조선 선적 주기 및 지역 보험료를 위협합니다.
인근 시리섬 인근에서도 추가적인 폭발이 있었다는 보고는 이번 공격이 여러 에너지 시설에 걸쳐 동시다발적으로 광범위한 작전상의 불확실성을 조성하기 위해 설계되었을 수 있음을 시사합니다.
이러한 패턴은 기반 시설을 영구적으로 파괴하기보다는 이란 남부 석유 네트워크 전반의 취약성을 입증하려는 의도가 담긴 작전임을 나타냅니다.
라반섬에서 피어오르는 검은 연기 기둥은 삼엄한 경비를 받는 시설조차 노출되어 있음을 암시했기에 즉각적인 심리적, 경제적 의미를 가졌습니다.
소방팀이 화재를 신속하게 진압한 것으로 알려졌으며 이란 당국은 인명 피해가 없다고 밝혀, 이번 타격이 제한적인 물리적 피해만을 입혔음을 보여주었습니다.

하지만 정치적, 전략적 효과는 훨씬 더 클 수 있는데, 통제된 사건이라 할지라도 이란의 방공망 보장 능력에 대한 신뢰를 약화시킬 수 있기 때문입니다.
라반 석유 정제 시설
미라주-2000-9 연루설과 그 배후의 군사적 논리
이란 군 소식통은 UAE가 운용하는 미라주-2000-9 전투기가 이번 타격을 실행했다고 주장했으나, 레이더 항적이나 이미지, 무기 파편 등은 공개되지 않았습니다.

그럼에도 불구하고 미라주-2000-9은 걸프 지역에서 운용되는 가장 진보된 전투기 중 하나이기에, 뒷받침하는 증거가 없더라도 군사적으로는 해당 주장이 그럴듯하게 받아들여지고 있습니다.
아랍에미리트가 운용하는 이 항공기는 현대적인 전자전 시스템, 정밀 유도 타격 능력 및 페르시아만을 횡단하여 임무를 수행할 수 있는 충분한 항속 거리를 갖추고 있습니다.
에미리트 영토에서 출격한 미라주-2000-9은 이론적으로 저고도 비행 프로필과 해상 접근 경로를 통해 노출을 최소화하면서 라반섬에 빠르게 도달할 수 있습니다.
이란 측 계정들은 또한 윙룽-2 무장 드론이 이번 타격을 지원했을 수 있다고 주장하며, 이는 정찰과 정밀 교전이 결합된 합동 작전이었음을 시사합니다.

그러한 전력 구성은 드론이 목표물을 식별하고 유인 항공기가 원거리 정밀 무기를 투하하는 현대 걸프 지역의 공군력 교리와 일치합니다.
그렇다 하더라도, UAE에 특정한 주장의 주요 진원지가 이란 관영 언론과 소셜 플랫폼이었다는 점에서 해당 의혹은 여전히 확인되지 않은 상태입니다.
독립적인 증거가 나올 때까지 분석가들은 미라주-2000-9 작전의 군사적 타당성과 실제로 그러한 작전이 일어났는지에 대한 훨씬 좁은 질문을 분리해서 보아야 합니다.
미국과 이스라엘의 부인이 초래한 제3자 위기
미국과 이스라엘 중 어느 쪽도 이번 타격을 수행하지 않았다는 미국 측의 대이란 메시지는 이번 사건을 둘러싼 가장 중대한 전개 중 하나입니다.
워싱턴은 더 넓은 대결 구도를 완화하고 장기적인 정치적 해결을 위한 공간을 확보하기 위해 최근 2주간의 휴전을 중재한 바 있습니다.
만약 미국이 즉각적으로 개입하지 않았음을 전달했다면, 미국 관리들은 이란이 지역 전역의 미군을 상대로 직접 보복할 가능성을 우려했을 것입니다.
미군 기지, 해군 자산 및 물류 시설들이 이란 미사일 사거리 내의 걸프 지역 전역에 분산되어 있다는 점에서 이러한 우려는 전략적으로 타당합니다.
이스라엘 관리들 또한 즉각 개입 사실을 부인했으며, 나다브 쇼샤니 중령은 이스라엘 항공기나 무기가 이번 타격에 참여했다는 주장을 공개적으로 반박했습니다.
따라서 결합된 부인들은 세 가지 가능성을 남깁니다. 실제 제3자에 의한 공격, 이란의 오판, 또는 다른 행위자에 의한 의도적인 정보전입니다.
제3자의 작전은 휴전의 모호성을 이용하는 동시에 테헤란이 잘못된 목표물을 향해 보복하게 만들 수 있다는 점에서 특히 위험합니다.

반대로, 만약 의혹이 정확하지 않은 것으로 판명된다면, 불충분한 정보에 기반한 이란의 급격한 걸프 국가 상대 보복은 갈등을 걷잡을 수 없이 확대할 수 있습니다.
이란의 보복은 이미 분쟁의 양상을 바꾸어 놓았다
이란 국영 텔레비전은 이후 테헤란이 아랍에미리트와 쿠웨이트 내의 석유 관련 시설을 향해 미사일과 드론을 발사했다고 보도했습니다.
표적이 된 것으로 알려진 장소 중에는 알-푸자이라가 포함되어 있으며, 이곳의 항구와 석유 기반 시설은 걸프 지역 해상 에너지 시스템 내의 핵심 노드를 상징합니다.
보도된 보복 타격은 이란 지도부가 라반섬 공격을 고립된 사건이 아니라 조직적인 지역적 침략으로 해석했음을 시사합니다.
이란의 전략은 역사적으로 에너지 기반 시설에 대한 상호적 에스컬레이션을 강조해 왔는데, 이는 그러한 표적이 대규모 전장 사상자를 피하면서도 즉각적인 경제적 압박을 가할 수 있기 때문입니다.

아랍에미리트와 쿠웨이트 내 시설을 위협함으로써 테헤란은 이란 석유 기반 시설에 대한 공격이 대칭적인 결과를 초래한다는 점을 입증하려 하는 것으로 보입니다.
에미리트 방공망이 날아오는 발사체 중 최소 일부를 요격했다는 보고는 걸프 국가들이 이미 신속한 보복 가능성을 예상하고 있었음을 나타냅니다.
성공적인 요격이라 할지라도 미사일 방어 시스템이 값비싼 요격 미사일을 소모하게 만들고 지역 전력 태세 내의 더 넓은 취약성을 노출시키기 때문에 작전상의 비용을 발생시킵니다.
따라서 이번 위기는 이제 정유소의 회복력, 미사일 재고, 그리고 걸프 지역 방공망 구조의 인내심을 둘러싼 소모전이 될 위험에 처해 있습니다.
호르무즈 해협, 새로운 에스컬레이션 주기에 직면
라반섬에 대한 공격은 미국의 중재로 맺어진 휴전이 공식적으로 발효된 지 불과 몇 시간 만에 발생했으며, 이는 휴전의 장기적인 생존 가능성에 대한 의구심을 즉각 불러일으켰습니다.

전 세계적으로 거래되는 석유의 약 5분의 1이 호르무즈 해협을 통과하기 때문에, 라반섬 주변에서 지속되는 모든 에스컬레이션은 전 세계적인 경제적 결과를 초래할 것입니다.
에너지 시설, 항구 및 해상 접근 경로가 미사일이나 항공 공격에 계속 직면하게 된다면 상업적 해운에 대한 보험 비용은 빠르게 상승할 수 있습니다.
이번 사건은 또한 최근의 중동 분쟁들에서 나타나고 있는 더 넓은 전략적 교훈을 강화합니다. 물류 기반 시설에 대한 제한적인 타격이 종종 상징적인 전장 승리보다 더 중요하다는 점입니다.
정유소, 수출 터미널, 유조선 경로 및 방공 포대들은 종합적으로 걸프 지역의 전력 태세와 국가적 회복력의 작전적 중추를 형성합니다.
그렇기 때문에 상대적으로 사소한 정유소 화재라도 훨씬 더 큰 물리적 파괴를 수반하는 전통적인 전장 교전보다 더 큰 지정학적 효과를 낼 수 있습니다.

UAE 미라주-2000-9의 역할 의혹을 둘러싼 불확실성은 확인되지 않은 서술들이 이제 지역 전역의 군사적 의사 결정에 영향을 미치고 있다는 점에서 위험을 더욱 가중시킵니다.
명확한 증거가 신속히 나오지 않는 한, 라반섬 타격은 가해진 피해보다는 모호함 자체가 어떻게 페르시아만을 또 다른 대결로 몰아넣었는지에 대한 사건으로 기억될 수 있습니다.
호르무즈 해협 주변에서 보복 주기가 길어지면 걸프 국가들은 이미 한계에 도달한 지역 전장 전역에 항공기를 분산 배치하고, 석유 시설을 요새화하며, 추가적인 미사일 방어 자산들을 투입해야만 할 것입니다.
그러한 확장된 방어 태세는 지역 군대가 수주간의 긴장 고조 이후 대비 태세를 유지하려 하는 바로 그 시점에 군수 지원 부담과 요격 미사일 지출을 늘리게 될 것입니다.
거래자와 보험사들이 일반적으로 확인된 전장 피해보다는 인지된 에스컬레이션 궤적에 따라 위험 가격을 책정하기 때문에, 국제 에너지 시장은 추가적인 타격이 발생하기도 전에 반응할 수 있습니다.

따라서 라반섬 사건은 이제 단순히 고립된 정유소 공격이 아니라, 걸프 전역에 걸친 억제력, 해양 안보 및 전략적 신뢰를 둘러싼 더 넓은 쟁탈전의 잠재적 도화선이 되었습니다.

UAE Mirage-2000-9 Jets Accused of Striking Iran’s Lavan Island Refinery, Threatening Collapse of Strait of Hormuz Ceasefire - Defence Security Asia

UAE Mirage-2000-9 Jets Accused of Striking Iran’s Lavan Island Refinery, Threatening Collapse of Strait of Hormuz Ceasefire -

UAE Mirage-2000-9 Jets Accused of Striking Iran’s Lavan Island Refinery, Threatening Collapse of Strait of Hormuz CeasefireUnverified Iranian claims that UAE-operated Mirage-2000-9 fighter jets struck the Lavan Island refinery have intensified fears of a wider Persian Gulf conflict, placing the Strait of Hormuz, global oil markets and the fragile U.S.-brokered ceasefire under immediate pressure.

EnglishETCInternational

By admin On Apr 9, 2026

 Share

(DEFENCE SECURITY ASIA) — The attack on Iran’s Lavan Island refinery has transformed a fragile two-week ceasefire into the most dangerous escalation inside the Persian Gulf since Washington and Tehran halted direct hostilities.

Iranian military-linked sources claimed the refinery strike was conducted by Mirage-2000-9 fighter aircraft operated by the United Arab Emirates, immediately expanding the crisis beyond the original U.S.-Iran confrontation.

Because Lavan Island sits near the Strait of Hormuz and processes approximately 55,000 barrels daily, the attack carried significance far beyond its limited physical destruction.

UAE Mirage fighter jet

Iranian officials described the strike as an “enemy attack” and a “cowardly attack,” while state-aligned media rapidly circulated allegations involving Emirati Mirage-2000-9 aircraft and possibly Wing Loong-2 armed drones.

The United States reportedly informed Tehran through diplomatic channels that the operation was not linked to either Washington or Israel, creating immediate suspicion that another regional actor may have intervened independently.

Israel publicly denied involvement, with Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani stating that Israeli forces were not connected to the strike, further deepening uncertainty regarding the true perpetrator.

The combination of official denials, unverified accusations and rapid Iranian retaliation has produced a strategic environment where perception now matters almost as much as confirmed military facts.

If Tehran ultimately concludes that the United Arab Emirates directly targeted critical Iranian energy infrastructure, Gulf deterrence dynamics could shift from covert confrontation toward open interstate conflict.

Equally significant, the incident demonstrates how limited attacks against relatively small energy facilities can generate disproportionate geopolitical consequences when they occur near the Strait of Hormuz.

No independent evidence has yet confirmed the alleged involvement of UAE Mirage-2000-9 aircraft, meaning the central accusation driving regional escalation remains speculative rather than verified.

That uncertainty significantly increases escalation risks because military planners may begin responding to assumptions, intercepted rumours and politically convenient narratives rather than independently established operational evidence.

The resulting atmosphere of mistrust threatens to place every subsequent explosion, radar contact and aircraft movement near the Strait of Hormuz inside an increasingly unstable regional crisis cycle.

READ: Iran Shoots Down Saudi-UAE Wing Loong II Over Shiraz, Exposing First Direct Gulf Drone Operation Inside Iranian AirspaceWhy Lavan Island Became a Strategic Target

Lavan Island occupies a strategically sensitive position inside the Persian Gulf because its refinery and export facilities support Iranian crude production near the Strait of Hormuz.

Although the refinery processes only around 55,000 barrels per day, its proximity to offshore infrastructure gives it disproportionate value within Iran’s wider petroleum logistics network.

Any disruption on Lavan Island therefore threatens not only refinery output but also maritime export schedules, tanker loading cycles and regional insurance premiums.

Reports indicating additional explosions near nearby Siri Island suggest the attack may have been designed to create wider operational uncertainty across multiple energy facilities simultaneously.

That pattern would indicate an operation intended less to destroy infrastructure permanently than to demonstrate vulnerability throughout Iran’s southern oil network.

The visible black smoke plumes emerging from Lavan Island immediately carried psychological and economic significance because they suggested that even heavily defended facilities remained exposed.

Firefighting teams reportedly contained the blaze quickly and Iranian authorities stated that no casualties occurred, indicating that the strike achieved only limited physical damage.

However, the political and strategic effect may prove considerably larger because even a contained incident can undermine confidence in Iranian air-defence coverage.

Lavan oil refinery facilityThe Mirage-2000-9 Allegation and the Military Logic Behind It

Iranian military sources alleged that UAE-operated Mirage-2000-9 fighters executed the strike, yet no radar tracks, imagery or weapons fragments have been released publicly.

The Mirage-2000-9 is nevertheless one of the most advanced combat aircraft in Gulf service, making the accusation militarily plausible even without supporting evidence.

Operated by the United Arab Emirates, the aircraft combines modern electronic warfare systems, precision-guided strike capability and sufficient range to conduct missions across the Persian Gulf.

A Mirage-2000-9 launched from Emirati territory could theoretically reach Lavan Island rapidly while minimizing exposure through low-level flight profiles and maritime approach routes.

Iranian-aligned accounts additionally claimed that Wing Loong-2 armed drones may have supported the strike, suggesting a combined operation involving reconnaissance and precision engagement.

Such a force package would align with contemporary Gulf airpower doctrine, where drones locate targets and manned aircraft deliver standoff precision munitions.

Even so, the allegation remains unverified because the primary vector for the UAE-specific claim has been state-aligned Iranian media and social platforms.

Until independent evidence emerges, analysts must separate the military feasibility of a Mirage-2000-9 operation from the much narrower question of whether one actually occurred.

U.S. and Israeli Denials Create a Third-Party Crisis

The reported American message to Tehran that neither the United States nor Israel conducted the strike represents one of the most consequential developments surrounding the incident.

Washington had only recently brokered a two-week ceasefire intended to de-escalate the broader confrontation and preserve space for a longer political settlement.

If the United States truly conveyed immediate non-involvement, American officials likely feared that Iran could otherwise retaliate directly against U.S. forces across the region.

That concern remains strategically justified because American bases, naval assets and logistical facilities remain dispersed across the Gulf within Iranian missile range.

Israeli officials also denied involvement immediately, with Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani publicly rejecting claims that Israeli aircraft or weapons participated in the strike.

The combined denials therefore leave three possible explanations: a genuine third-party attack, an Iranian misinterpretation, or deliberate information warfare by another actor.

A third-party operation would be especially dangerous because it could exploit the ceasefire’s ambiguity while driving Tehran toward retaliation against the wrong target.

Conversely, if the allegation proves inaccurate, Iran’s rapid response against Gulf states could widen the conflict through escalation based upon incomplete information.

Iranian Retaliation Has Already Shifted the Conflict

Iranian state television subsequently reported that Tehran launched missiles and drones against oil-related facilities inside the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.

Among the locations reportedly targeted was Al-Fujairah, whose port and petroleum infrastructure represent critical nodes within the Gulf’s maritime energy system.

The reported retaliatory strikes suggest that Iranian leaders interpreted the Lavan Island attack not as an isolated incident but as coordinated regional aggression.

Iranian strategy has historically emphasized reciprocal escalation against energy infrastructure because such targets impose immediate economic pressure while avoiding large battlefield casualties.

By threatening facilities in the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, Tehran appears determined to demonstrate that attacks on Iranian oil infrastructure carry symmetrical consequences.

Reports that Emirati air defences intercepted at least some incoming projectiles indicate that Gulf states had already anticipated the possibility of rapid retaliation.

Even successful interceptions nevertheless impose operational costs because missile-defence systems consume expensive interceptors and expose broader vulnerabilities within regional force posture.

The crisis therefore now risks becoming an attritional contest centred upon refinery resilience, missile inventories and the endurance of Gulf air-defence architecture.

The Strait of Hormuz Now Faces a Renewed Escalation Cycle

The attack on Lavan Island occurred only hours after the U.S.-brokered ceasefire formally entered effect, immediately raising doubts regarding its long-term viability.

Because approximately one-fifth of globally traded oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, any sustained escalation around Lavan Island would carry worldwide economic consequences.

Insurance costs for commercial shipping could increase rapidly if energy facilities, ports and maritime approaches continue facing missile or air attack.

The incident also reinforces a wider strategic lesson emerging throughout recent Middle Eastern conflicts: limited strikes against logistics infrastructure often matter more than symbolic battlefield victories.

Refineries, export terminals, tanker routes and air-defence batteries collectively form the operational backbone of Gulf force posture and national resilience.

For that reason, even a relatively minor refinery fire can generate larger geopolitical effects than a conventional battlefield exchange involving far greater physical destruction.

The uncertainty surrounding the alleged UAE Mirage-2000-9 role additionally increases the danger because unverified narratives now influence military decision-making across the region.

Unless clear evidence emerges quickly, the Lavan Island strike may become remembered less for the damage inflicted than for how ambiguity itself pushed the Persian Gulf toward another confrontation.

A prolonged cycle of retaliation around the Strait of Hormuz would also force Gulf states to disperse aircraft, harden petroleum facilities and commit additional missile-defence assets across an already stretched regional battlespace.

That expanded defensive posture would increase logistical burdens and interceptor expenditure at precisely the moment when regional militaries are attempting to preserve readiness following weeks of heightened tension.

International energy markets could react even before further strikes occur because traders and insurers typically price risk according to perceived escalation trajectories rather than confirmed battlefield damage.

The Lavan Island incident therefore now represents not merely an isolated refinery attack but a potential trigger for a wider contest over deterrence, maritime security and strategic credibility across the Gulf.

[백선호]

UAE가 얻어맞으면서도 미국과 이스라엘이 이란을 공습할 때 가만히 있었던 것은 혹시나 피아식별이 잘못될 걱정 때문에 가만히 있었을까요...???

[위종민]

이스라엘이나 미국 입장에선 빨리 끝낼 자신이 있었을 땐 UAE의 개입이 불러올 외교적 파장이 신경쓰였을 것 같긴 합니다. 이게 사실이면 이젠 그딴거 신경 안 쓰고 받을 수 있는 도움은 받기로 한 모양이네요.

[김유철]

한참 공방중일 때 이란이 격추한 미군 드론 잔해라고 공개한 것 중 중국제 윙룽 II라는 분석도 있고하니... 아무래도 UAE는 이란이 눈치챌 수 있는 방식으로 툭툭 반격하면서 이란의 추가공격을 억지하려고 하는 것 같습니다. 궂이 자국만 보유한 미라지로 보복하면서 자신들이 충분한 반격능력이 있음에도 자재하고 있으며, 휴전이 끝난 이후 자국의 핵심 인프라가 공격받으면 바로 이란의 인프라에 보복하겠다는 의도를 전달한 것으로 보입니다.

[위종민]

굳이 미라지로 때린 걸 보면 말씀하신 의도일 기ㅡ능성이 크겠습니다. 똑같이 전쟁으로 인한 경제적 피해가 큰 카타르는 유화적 스탠스로 보이고..