The looming Iranian threat is set to take center stage in the expected meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump next week in Florida. Israeli officials are preparing a comprehensive intelligence dossier on Iran, detailing its efforts to revive its nuclear program, rebuild its ballistic missile arsenal, expand the global terrorist activity of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and increase funding for Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and other terrorist organizations.
The dossier to be presented to Trump and his team is aimed at forging close Israeli-US coordination to address what Jerusalem views as the root of the Iranian problem. Israeli officials believe the US president recognizes Iran as the head of the terrorism octopus in the Middle East, the aggressive force driving regional instability and the main obstacle to advancing a comprehensive regional agreement, Trump's envisioned mega-deal. Even so, Trump has so far refrained from decisive action against the regime, and the meeting with Netanyahu is intended to establish clear milestones for handling Iran.
This time, Prime Minister Netanyahu will travel without Ron Dermer, the former minister who served for years as his closest confidant in dealings with the US administration. His absence is expected to be felt keenly on this trip. Filling the role will be Israel's ambassador to Washington, Yechiel Leiter. Leiter is well regarded at the White House but does not yet enjoy the same level of deep personal connections as his predecessor. On the other hand, Dermer also carried baggage with parts of the administration, while Leiter arrives with a clean slate.
The Iranian octopus
About a month ago, Israel Hayom reported intelligence indicating that Iran, through Hezbollah, Hamas and their command centers in Turkey, has been advancing terrorist attacks in Europe and Latin America. One such plot, an attempted assassination of Israel's ambassador to Mexico, Einat Kranz-Neiger, was thwarted by local authorities after intelligence provided by Israel.
The updated Israeli assessment holds that without toppling the regime in Tehran, Israel is doomed to many more years of recurring wars, at varying intensities, against Iran's proxies, including Hezbollah, Palestinian terrorist organizations and the Houthis, and potentially against Iran itself.
The dilemma is whether to embark on a dramatic move against the regime, a step that could trigger military escalation in which Israel's air and technological superiority is expected to prevail, but at the cost of further days of paralysis for the country and its economy. On the other hand, there is a desire to bring down once and for all the Islamist terror regime that is the primary source of chaos, terrorism and wars against Israel and across the region. The collapse of the regime would greatly ease the disarmament of Hezbollah and the dismantling of its political power in Lebanon, leave Hamas and Islamic Jihad without financial backing, and likely also lead to the downfall of the Houthi regime in Yemen.
The 12-day war last June exposed the weakness and vulnerability of the radical regime in Tehran and its inability to protect its facilities and senior officials. At the same time, it created a rare opportunity to move toward toppling the dictatorship. That opportunity was not seized, in part due to the lack of American cooperation on the issue, even though the US carried out a limited strike on the Fordow nuclear facility. According to one senior security official, another key point in persuading the Americans will be Iran's involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war. Removing Iran from that equation would reduce the Russian threat to Europe's security.
Beyond the military option
How could this be done? One possible course is military action, designed to deliver another severe blow to the regime, but at a significant cost to Israel. IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir hinted this week that Israel may need to act against Iran again. At a ceremony marking the change of head of the Planning Directorate, Zamir said: "At the center of the IDF's threats stands the campaign against Iran. The campaign against Iran concluded with significant achievements. Our enemies once again felt the reach of the IDF's long arm, which will continue to strike wherever required, on near and distant fronts." Iran's foreign minister responded that Iran is well prepared for an Israeli attack.
A military move will likely be necessary in any case, but Israel's approach holds that it should be leveraged alongside aggressive action on other fronts.
Iran's economic situation is deteriorating by the day. The local currency, the rial, is hitting record lows; poverty is deepening; many educated Iranians are leaving the country; electricity is available only for a few hours a day; and fuel at gas stations is rationed. The water crisis is also worsening, with reservoirs closing and tap water in large parts of the country reduced to a trickle. At the same time, internal unrest is growing, even as the regime seeks to suppress it through force and brutality, imposing internet restrictions to curb its spread.
The US and Western countries could impose far harsher sanctions than those currently in place, including a complete shutdown of oil exports and a sweeping embargo on dual-use goods that aid missile development and the weapons industry. Such economic pressure is intended, first and foremost, to force concessions from the regime, both on the nuclear program and on ballistic missiles and the export of terrorism. These are demands Washington has emphasized mainly over the past year, and which Tehran has so far rejected.
Within the regime itself, voices are already being heard, including from President Masoud Pezeshkian, warning of economic and social collapse, driven in part by severe infrastructure failures in water and energy, and urging compromise. For now, these voices are being drowned out by the hardline stance of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Stronger economic pressure could change his calculus.
Actively toppling the regime would also require assisting internal Iranian opposition forces, in order to generate domestic pressure and destabilization. Such steps would at the very least force the regime to turn its attention inward, and at a more advanced stage, with external support, could lead to its actual overthrow.
