Israeli security officials are expressing doubts about the strategy behind the attack on Iran, according to a report by the British newspaper Guardian. As stated in the related report, Israel did not have a realistic plan for regime change when the airstrikes against Tehran began. Instead, assessments that the bombardments could trigger a mass popular uprising inside Iran appear to have been based more on political expectations and “wishful thinking” rather than reliable intelligence information.
The bombings and expectations for uprising in Iran
According to the report, the military operation was based on the assessment that internal pressure on the Iranian regime would be strengthened if the country received strong strikes from outside. However, several Israeli defense and intelligence analysts believe that such a scenario was never particularly realistic. As sources cited by the Guardian note, there were specific plans for how Iran’s ballistic missiles, nuclear facilities, and military industry could be targeted. But there was no corresponding strategy for how political overthrow of the Iranian leadership could be achieved through an air campaign.
Iran: The enriched uranium issue
One of the key issues that will determine the outcome of the war, according to the same sources, is the fate of approximately 440.9 kilograms of enriched uranium that Iran possesses. This quantity is considered sufficient for constructing more than ten nuclear warheads. As former Israeli security officials point out, if this material remains in Iran and the country’s new leadership stays in power, there is a risk that Tehran could accelerate the development of nuclear weapons. For this reason, according to the same assessments, the success or failure of the conflict will largely depend on what happens to this specific nuclear stockpile.
Uncertainty about Iran’s new leadership
The situation becomes even more complicated after the assassination of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the assumption of leadership by his son, Mojtaba Khamenei. Some former Israeli intelligence officials estimate that the new leader’s positions on Iran’s nuclear program are not completely known. As they argue, Ali Khamenei had invested significant resources in the nuclear program but never gave the final order for nuclear weapon construction. For his successor, however, there are no corresponding clear indications of how he will proceed.
Military success but political uncertainty
Despite the successes of Israeli forces in military operations, several analysts warn that the future of the conflict remains uncertain. Israel’s immediate strategic priority is to weaken Iran and its allies as much as possible. However, some former officials express fears that excessive emphasis on military power may limit the possibilities for political initiatives and new alliances in the Middle East. As they note, if the Iranian regime survives the war, then the long-term consequences of the conflict may prove much more complex than initially estimated.
