Throughout his career Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made the confrontation with Iran, particularly preventing it from obtaining nuclear arms, a foundation stone of his policy.
He has often explained his vision of a policy in a Hobbesian Middle East in which Israel must be strong in the face of the Iranian threat. Several years ago he said, “In the Middle East, and in many parts of the world, there is a simple truth: There is no place for the weak. The weak crumble, are slaughtered and are erased from history, while the strong, for good or for ill, survive.”
However, in his first 100 days in office since the November 2022 election and the forming of the government in late December 2022, Netanyahu has preferred to shy away from public confrontations with Iran. This is not because he thinks Iran has become less of a threat, but, rather, because domestic politics has been dominating the headlines in Israel. The protests against the judicial reform became the main issue in the country in the last months.
However, at the same time, Israel continues to confront Iran. Over the last week Syria and the Iranian regime have accused Israel of four airstrikes in Syria. In addition, Al-Ain media says that Israel-Iran tensions could spread into a direct confrontation. Is the government sleepwalking into this confrontation, or is this merely a policy that is occurring quietly on the sidelines?
One of the interesting aspects of Netanyahu’s Iran policy is that he has often been loudest about certain issues, such as the Iran deal, and more circumspect when it comes to any kind of direct confrontation. What that means is that Israel often says one thing and does another. When Israel is the loudest about the Iranian threat, it does not necessarily mean that plans to confront Iran are advancing at a faster pace. When Israel is quiet, sometimes it means the confrontation may actually be more serious.
Let’s look at some key issues. Iranian nuclear enrichment continues. Iran is enriching uranium beyond 80%. In early March the IAEA said it found uranium particles enriched to 83.7%. This is increasing toward the amount of enrichment needed for a weapon. For many years Israel’s redline, which Netanyahu once showed to the UN in the form of a drawing of a bomb, has been Iran’s ability to stockpile enough weapons-grade uranium for a weapon. Basically Iran is reaching “breakout,” a period where it can race to construct and test a bomb. Israel can’t wait until Iran has an actual nuclear device, because a strike on any kind of actual weapon could be catastrophic. That means the real redline is before Iran “weaponizes” the uranium.
The question that is clearly important regarding Iran’s enrichment is whether Iran is reaching a point of diminishing returns. Iran can’t just enrich for the sake of enriching. On the other hand, Iran may be concerned about making an actual bomb, because it may sense that Russia and China, key partners of Iran, do not want the regime to build an actual bomb.
In this context Iran’s current position in the region is important. Iran recently agreed to a China-brokered deal with Saudi Arabia. It wouldn’t be logical for Tehran to build a bomb that threatens the region, after just agreeing to tone down tensions with Riyadh. This means that Iran’s enrichment may be reaching a dead end. It will have a lot of enriched uranium and be close to breaking out for a weapon, but it may be held back by Russia, China and other countries.
On March 6 the US and Israel issued a joint statement on the meeting of the US-Israel Strategic Consultative Group. This came in the wake of a meeting between Assistant to the US President for National Security Affairs Jake Sullivan and National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi, Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and a senior Israeli interagency delegation at the White House on March 6. The statement said that “the officials reviewed with significant concern advances in Iran’s nuclear program, and affirmed their mutual objective of further enhancing the long-standing security partnership between Israel and the United States. In this regard, officials pledged to enhance coordination on measures to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and to further deter Iran’s hostile regional activities.”
The question is whether Iran is actually deterred. Considering Iran’s continued attempts to move weapons to Syria and also its work with Russia and China, it does not seem deterred. It may be deterring itself temporarily by keeping enrichment at around 84%.
Another issue that has plagued Israel is Iran’s precision-guided munitions. These are weapons that can maneuver or carry out precise attacks on Israeli strategic infrastructure. Unlike “dumb” rockets, these weapons can be a game changer in the hands of Israel’s enemies. Iran has moved these systems to Hezbollah, and Hezbollah is making its own PGMs. This was once considered an issue of major concern for Israel. However, Israel now has a maritime deal with Lebanon that relates to sensitive energy exploration off the coast. Israel would be concerned about any strike on Hezbollah’s PGMs, because of that deal.
Hezbollah was allegedly behind infiltrating a man into Israel in March. The man then placed an IED near Metulla junction. Israel is concerned about this threat. Hezbollah may also have been behind moving a UAV capability to Dabaa airbase near Qusair in Syria. That UAV capability was hit by an airstrike on April 1, according to foreign reports.
Netanyahu has been relatively modest in his recent condemnations of Iran. He blamed Iran for an attack on an oil tanker in February. Israel also blamed Iran for being behind a plot in Greece. In both cases Iran was trying to strike at “soft” targets far from Israel. Iran has been targeting ships and tankers off the coast of Oman for many years. It has increasingly targeted ships it thinks are linked to Israel. Iran uses drones flown from Chabahar to carry out those attacks.
The first 100 days of Netanyahu’s administration illustrate how Israel can walk softly and carry a big stick, in the sense that one doesn’t need to peddle fear about Iran’s nuclear ambitions in order to continue to confront Iran in the region.