Israel's Dual-Purpose Strike on Iran
Netanyahu checkmates the MAGAs
By: Salman Rafi Sheikh
The timing of Israel’s long-anticipated June 13 military operation against Iran, aimed at significantly degrading Tehran’s nuclear program, appears to serve a dual purpose—not only to dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure but also to undermine ongoing US-supported diplomatic efforts toward a negotiated resolution. Ultimately, the Israelis seek to establish conditions under which Iran possesses no nuclear capability whatsoever. This, for Israel, is the best option to maintain its hegemony in the region. In the wake of the gradual US exit from the Middle East and with the Arab states starting their own armament programs, Israel aims to ensure that it retains a clear strategic advantage.
For several months, the Netanyahu regime has been trying to convince the Trump administration to do a joint military operation to obliterate Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. The Trump administration debated this option for months until it waved it off when internal divisions began to emerge. Israel, however, was adamant. Following Trump’s decision to decline to deliver an air strike on Iran—because it would neither ensure a total obliteration of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure nor avoid an all-out regional war— and start negotiations, Netanyahu reiterated in early May that agreement with Iran would work only if it allowed the signers to “go in, blow up the facilities, dismantle all the equipment under American supervision with American execution.”
Therefore, while the immediate incentive for the ongoing strikes may have been the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s so-called ‘censure’ that Iran was enriching more uranium than allowed, Israel had already prepared its attacks. With Tehran fully aware of Israel’s intentions, negotiations with Washington became a non-starter. An additional factor contributing to the failure of negotiations to produce any meaningful result was that the US proposal would have required Iran to phase out its uranium enrichment infrastructure almost entirely, leaving Iran with the option to either submit to this pressure and/or confront the Israeli military.
For Israel, too, the military option was always the preferred one, especially in the context of its recent military successes against Hamas and Hezbollah. The dismantling of the al-Assad regime in Syria has further weakened Iran’s capacity to project hard power against Israel from multiple fronts. Internationally, Russia is preoccupied with Ukraine, and China has no interest in getting militarily engaged. For Israel, therefore, the only logical course to completely dismantle the “axis of resistance" is the destruction of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
Israeli targets in Iran say it all. First of all, several strikes appear to be highly precise insofar as they targeted key figures, including the chief of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and its nuclear physicists. How could Israel carry out such strikes? Reports indicate that extensive intelligence gathered over several years underpinned Israel’s plans. Israel has also targeted Iran’s main enrichment facility at Natanz. This is where Iran has the most near-bomb-grade nuclear fuel.
While there are several nuclear facilities spread all over Iran, the attacks on Natanz alongside assaults on Iran’s ballistic missile facilities are precisely a military execution of the kind of deal Israel wanted to make with Iran. For Israel, the best deal would include a complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile program. While the ballistic missile program wasn’t part of Iran’s ongoing negotiations with the Trump administration, Israel’s own plans appear to be clear in terms of weakening Iran’s overall military capability, not just its nuclear infrastructure.
A regional war, as a result, looms large over the Middle East. This is happening at a time when the White House in the US is occupied by a President who claims to be the best deal maker in the world. Two days ago, Trump claimed that he could solve any problem. He was referring to the Kashmir conflict in the subcontinent. Yet, his administration’s inability to either present an acceptable plan to Iran and/or rein in Israel’s military ambitions shows his utter incapacity to steer things in the right direction—and effectively.
What has enabled this failure is the divisions that exist within the Trump administration. A senior US official anonymously told a leading media house that “there’s clearly a lobby for war with Iran vs. those who are more aligned with the president, that know he is the one that has been able to bring them to the negotiating table.”
The failure is evident not just in the fact that Israel has attacked Iran but also in terms of what Israel plans to do. Netanyahu said that Israeli attacks will continue for “as long as it takes” to achieve key objectives. It means Israel is not looking to merely damage Iran’s program and slow its progress by a year or two. Its objective is total dismantling. Whether it will be able to achieve this or not, however, depends on Iran’s own ability to retaliate and whether the international community can prevent Israel from escalating.
If escalation happens, it will not only mean more strikes to destroy currently targeted facilities and decapitate the military and nuclear leadership but also strikes against other nuclear facilities that haven’t yet been targeted. Among them is the Fordow facility, half a mile under the surface. Several American officials are reported to have said in the past that unless Frodow is destroyed, Iran will retain the ability to produce weapons-grade uranium. Israel, within its currently stated objectives, will go after this facility as well.
Notable in this context is the total absence of US pressure on Jerusalem to exercise restraint. Within the Trump administration, it appears that hawks have finally been able to overcome the MAGA supporters. If the former prefer a military strike on Iran, the latter prefer diplomacy and no fresh war. Nonetheless, no further rounds of talks—one was to be held in a few days—can now be expected to come up with an acceptable solution. For now, therefore, Israel has won even if it fails to completely dismantle Iran’s nuclear program immediately.
Dr. Salman Rafi Sheikh is an Assistant Professor of Politics at the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS). He is a longtime regular contributor on diplomatic affairs for Asia Sentinel.