The "mishap" that struck Iran's Natanz nuclear facility on Sunday, just hours after advanced centrifuges installed there went online, looks more and more like sabotage than a coincidental malfunction in the facility's power grid, as Iranian media first reported.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
This is the second time in less than a year that this highly sensitive facility has been compromised. The extent of the damage is unknown, but experts have already hedged that it would take "months" to fix it.
Assuming the reports of sabotage are correct, it is safe to assume the damage was significant. Such a complicated operation entails great risk and is not carried out sans careful consideration or with the aim of inflicting only minor damage.
This was the case in two previous cases in which Natanz was targeted – the first in an operation attributed to Israel and the US about a decade ago, in which the Stuxnet malware paralyzed centrifuges for several months; and the second in a blast in 2020, which targeted the complex's centrifuges production line to the point of being decommissioned.
Details are sure to emerge in the next few days. Iranian security forces may have cordoned off the area for their investigation, but the facility is under 24/7 surveillance by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran may also seek to make the details public, in case it decides to name the culprits.
Naturally, Israel is the immediate suspect. More precisely – the Mossad intelligence agency is the suspect, having proved that it can reach targets deep on Iranian soil. There are more examples of this than anyone knows, as Israel rarely admits taking such action, but foreign media reports often attribute various incidents in Iran to Israel.
Many reports claim that Israel uses proxies on the ground for its operations. This is a relatively safe way to see an operation through, assuming the property distance is kept between the Israeli handlers and the foreign operatives on the ground, as even if they fail and get caught tracing their handlers is difficult.
If Israel is indeed responsible for the incident in Natanz, it is likely that it informed the US of its planned, as is customary. Washington has shown growing disapproval of Israel's activity against Iran, especially at sea. This has led to a series of leaks of sensitive information about some of the operations to the American media, apparently with the aim of signaling to Israel that Washington does not want it to interfere with its attempts to turn over a new leaf vis-à-vis Tehran.
It is unclear how the administration of US President Joe Biden will respond to the latest incident, which took place at a precarious time – just a few days after the resumption of indirect nuclear talks between the US and Iran.
Is his meetings with Israeli officials on Sunday, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin was careful not to comment on the Iranian issue but there is no doubt it was discussed behind closed doors.
Israel seeks to make sure that any new deal with Tehran is significantly better than the 2015 accords, especially with respect to its expiration date and in terms of the international oversight on Iran's nuclear efforts.
The ayatollahs' regime is, naturally, opposed to any revision of the original deal. Tehran had precondition its return to it in the full lifting of the stifling American sanctions and to demonstrate how serious is it, is has made some brazen moves in terms of uranium enrichment and other violations of the six-year-old pact.
It is unlikely that Sunday's incident in Natanz was related to these violations. Such operations take lengthy planning and if – as foreign media reports suggest – Israel was involved then it sought to deliver a two-pronged message: the first entailing an actual physical blow to Iran's nuclear program that will set it back some time; and the second falls under psychological warfare – proving yet again that Iran is vulnerable and that Israel will not relent when it comes to protecting its vital interests.
All this means that the ball is, again, in Iran's court. It will now have to decide about if, how, and when to retaliate, knowing that doing so will paint it as an aggressor trying to destabilize the Middle East – something likely to undermine the nuclear talks.
It could also try to order its proxies in Lebanon, the Gaza Strip, or Syria to do its bidding, although chances of that are relatively low. Tehran could also decide to hit Israeli or Jewish assets overseas – where it has no shortage of targets, especially given that the maritime sphere is not at play, as well.
Israel must therefore remain on high alert militarily and in terms of intelligence-gathering but it must also decide what will be its next move in what seems to be a slippery slope not only versus Iran but also vis-à-vis the Americans.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
