However, at the end of the "12-day war" and following the impressive military success, a central question arises: how to leverage the achievements in the military arena into successes in the political and diplomatic fields. How to prevent Iran from rebuilding its military and nuclear capabilities. The answer lies in one word: enforcement.

The political stage is no less critical than the military one, and it requires a transition from a policy of deterrence and attack to a policy of regulation and enforcement. The war results placed on the negotiating table of the international community (and also of Israel) a one-time opportunity. International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi himself clarified this point to the Iranians. With the entry into force of the ceasefire between Israel and Iran, Grossi wrote to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi about the importance of cooperation with the organization for a successful agreement, emphasizing that "this step could lead to a diplomatic solution to the years-long conflict surrounding the nuclear program."

Therefore, the central goal of the political move is to exploit the window of opportunities that has opened, the fact that the Iranian regime is wounded but not humiliated, to reach a comprehensive and new nuclear agreement with Iran. The crown jewel of the agreement must be preventing the reconstruction of Iran's nuclear program and the development of long-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. To achieve this goal, there is a need for an agreement that includes tight oversight mechanisms, sanctions, and, most importantly, a binding, effective, and uncompromising enforcement mechanism. In other words, the sword of punishment must always hang over Iran's head.

The best example of the importance of enforcement comes from Lebanon. As part of the ceasefire that took effect on November 27, 2024, and the renewal of understandings outlined in Security Council Resolution 1701 from August 2006, Hezbollah was required to withdraw north of the Litani River, and the Lebanese Armed Forces were to deploy in the south of the country. But the Shiite terror organization never sought to honor agreements, and since the ceasefire came into effect, it has violated it time and again.

However, the difference between the 2006 understandings and those of 2024 is that this time, Israel acts to forcibly enforce the agreement. "I have said many times," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained on November 27, "a good agreement is an agreement that is enforced – and we will enforce it." Indeed, according to data from the Alma Center, since the end of Operation Northern Arrows six months ago, the IDF carried out more than 400 strikes in Lebanon – an average of more than two strikes per day. The message is sharp and clear: a ceasefire does not grant immunity to terrorist activity, but is subject to enforcement. Every violation will receive a severe response.

Therefore, Iran's fate must be Hezbollah's fate in Lebanon. Just as Israel acts to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its strength and establishing terror infrastructure in southern Lebanon, so it must ensure that any future understanding with Iran includes clear and rigid enforcement mechanisms.

Past experience, particularly that of the nuclear agreement from July 2015, teaches that without strict enforcement, any agreement, no matter who drafts it, will quickly erode against Iranian determination.

There is a need to exploit the military successes of Operation Rising Lion, draw lessons from previous political initiatives, and lead to an agreement that will provide security for Israel and the entire world. Effective enforcement, including oversight, control, and readiness to act immediately, particularly through military means, is a necessary condition for Israel's achievements to translate into real and stable security.

The post How to prevent Iran from rebuilding appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran are being conducted based on the nuclear agreement that President Donald Trump withdrew from during his previous term, and the new agreement between the countries may not differ significantly from it, Reuters reported on Friday.

According to the article, the program will be divided over a 25-year period and will establish stricter supervision while expanding the transition clauses that limit but do not completely eliminate Tehran's nuclear capability.

In addition, four sources familiar with the issue said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu learned about the renewed negotiations between Washington and Tehran only 24 hours before the American announcement and just days before talks actually began.

According to the terms being discussed, Iran will limit the size of its stockpile and types of centrifuges, and will dilute, export, or seal its 60% uranium stockpile under unprecedented supervision from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – all in exchange for significant sanctions relief.

Dennis Ross, a former negotiator under both Republican and Democratic administrations, said any new agreement must go further than the nuclear deal by imposing permanent structural changes to Tehran's nuclear capabilities, reducing its infrastructure to the point where developing a bomb is no longer a practical option.

The post US-Iran nuclear deal may closely resemble 2015 agreement appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Jabotinsky's famous essay about the "iron wall" was ahead of its time and shaped the Israeli defense ethos – a view that remains with us even today. Jabotinsky stated, rightly, that only an iron wall would cause our enemies to want to reach compromises with us: A living people, he wrote, agrees to concessions on enormous, fateful questions like these only when they have no hope left. When not even a crack can be seen in the iron wall. Only then to radical groups whose slogan is "absolutely not" lose their charm, and the influence moves to the moderate groups.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

This is the situation with the radical ayatollah regime in Iran, against which we must erect an international iron wall, and certainly an Israeli one. But Israel's situation today is not like it was for the Yishuv in the Land of Israel in the 1920s. The "iron wall" essay, written 98 years ago, expresses a situation of existential anxiety of a small community with big dreams.

• Netanyahu: Iran is racing toward a nuclear bomb and the government is silent

Israel's military might, which I am proud to have helped shape during my term as IDF chief of staff when I constructed an option for military action against Iran, and now as defense minister who is leading the battle with the prime minister and the rest of the cabinet, is massive, stable, and solid. The iron wall Jabotinsky dreamed of has been built and exists.

It was built by the defense and security systems that operate constantly, through a strong army that is capable of defending Israel, and by the complex diplomatic battle Israel has been waging for years

The nuclear deal that was signed in Vienna in 2015 over the vocal and crude objection of the Israeli government was a failure of that diplomatic battle. The lesson to be learned from it is an important one – that an iron wall is built by deeds, not with words.

A military option is vital

Actions are first and foremost our ability to defend ourselves and disrupt our enemies' activities. A credible Israeli military option will also be of service to international powers, and is vital to ensure that an iron wall remains in place against Iran, leading to compromise. There will be no good, strong, and broad agreement without a viable military option for Israel.

Actions also mean handing over intelligence and knowledge, and finding sympathetic ears with our partners in general and our best friend, the US, in particular. The most important thing is to inculcate the approach that Iran is first and foremost a global and regional problem, and only after that a problem for Israel.

At this time, Iran continues to build up its nuclear project, which could pose an existential threat to Israel, as well as accelerating the regional arms race. Our steps as a government are clear, and led with the fact that we will act to prevent Iran from nuclearizing.

We share intelligence with our partners. We speak up clearly, and take care that there is someone who will listen by doing so in the right places, with the right people. We are forming quiet alliance with many entities who share our interests. We are operating in ways that are best kept quiet, and we are expanding and developing our operational capabilities constantly.

Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did much for Israel's security, but his exaggerated tactics in dealing with the US hurt our ability to prevent Iran's nuclear progress. At the end of his term in office, Iran was able to step up its capabilities.

This conduct even put bilateral support for Israel at risk in the US.

So we should ask, what are words, if not silence? Words and piles of words are no solution. The iron wall is built through actions, by quiet, Sisyphean labor by leaders, commanders, and fighters.

Israel's security is not a subject for political controversy. It should be the focus of cooperation and responsibility. I expect former Prime Minister Netanyahu to contribute his experience in this field, and not damage Israel's efforts. Indeed, we have much to learn from him.

To you, the citizens of Israel, I promise that we are doing everything possible with our partners, protecting our independence and developing our powers. We believe in our ability to prevent any existential threat.

Whoever believes in themselves has no boundaries.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Netanyahu's conduct gave Iran a boost appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

It has been 40 years since Israel bombed the nuclear reactor in Iraq. Even the most optimistic of Israeli leaders could not have imagined that Iraq would never try to pursue this project again.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Operation Opera, as the historic mission is known, was a message from Israel to the nations that seek to destroy it: The Jewish state will not allow them to lay their hands on a nuclear bomb. Israel made good on that promise when it took out the Syrian nuclear reactor in 2007.

Israel has sounded the same message regarding Tehran's 15-year march toward the bomb, but things are more complicated when it comes to Iran. The Islamic republic's nuclear sites are spread out, and some are situated deep inside mountains or surrounded by sophisticated air defense systems.

Moreover, contrary to Iraq and Syria, Tehran knows that Jerusalem is taking steps for a potential strike; it will not be caught off guard.

According to foreign media, the Mossad has in recent years carried out a series of operations to stall the regime's nuclear program, including seizing nuclear archives, targeting the Natanz nuclear reactor, and assassinating "the father of the Iranian nuclear bomb," Mohsen Fakhrizadeh.

Such actions may stall Iran's nuclear program but won't end it, and the challenges are not just operational, they are also diplomatic.

The Biden administration is convinced that the only way to keep Iran in check is through diplomacy, but Israel says it won't be bound by any deal with Tehran. Just last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would continue to deny Iran nuclear weapons even if that created friction with "our greatest friend: the United States." But it's safe to assume that the US' position will carry significant weight in any course of action Israel takes on Iran.

Israel has refused to hold talks on what it might get from the US if the nuclear deal is revived, for fear that this my come across as implicit endorsement. Nor is there talk on any side deal with the US in which the latter would pledge to bring Iran's nuclear program to a halt if all diplomatic efforts fail.

Maj. Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin, one of the eight pilots who carried out the airstrike on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in F-16A warplanes, believes that "a military attack on Iran is not the only option" and that it is "definitely not the time" to bomb Iran.

According to Yadlin, since the US is determined to return to the nuclear deal with Iran, "Israel must strike a separate agreement with the US that would address the question of what happens if all diplomatic efforts were to fail. Israel needs to reach an agreement with the US as to who would be responsible for stopping the Iranian program, how it would be stopped and when it would be right to act."

Still, he warned that "the Israeli Air Force and other agencies must continue to prepare for a military option in case all else fails."

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post A doctrine put to the test appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In a possible sign that the United States is ready to renew nuclear negotiations with Iran, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Tuesday night said, "The path to diplomacy is open."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Speaking to National Public Radio, Blinken, however, said that from the US perspective, "Right now, Iran is still a ways away from being in compliance, so we'll have to see what it does." 

Later in the interview, when asked if there was "any move underway to reopen direct diplomacy with Iran," Blinken responded by saying, "At present, [Us president Joe Biden], I think, [has] been very clear publicly, repeatedly, about where we stand. And we'll see what, if any, reaction Iran has to that.

"At some point presumably, if there's going to be any engagement on this, that would have to require diplomacy. That's what we're in the business of," Blinken said.

Last week, as a reminder, the US secretary of state said that if Iran returns to fulfilling its obligations under the nuclear agreement, the US would do the same.  

Earlier this month, Biden said the US would not lift sanctions imposed on Iran unless it stops enriching uranium and returns to its obligations under the 2015 nuclear deal.

 Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories! 

The post Blinken: Path to diplomacy with Iran is open appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Aviv Kochavi's speech at the annual INSS conference on Tuesday might have been in Hebrew, but what he said was aimed at speakers of both English and Farsi.

 Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

In his speech, Kochavi presented a new and uncompromising approach – no to any nuclear deal with Iran, either in the original format or an improved one, and yes to contingency plans that would allow Israel to attack, if necessary.

These two messages were intended to echo from Washington to Tehran, from the Biden administration to the bureau of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The chief of staff wanted to make it clear to them both that Israel will continue to oppose Iranian nuclearization in any form. Israel would be happy to have the Americans at its side, but if needed, will be willing to take action alone, and is even making plans for an attack scenario, as Israel Hayom reported two weeks ago.

Kochavi was in step with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who espouses a similar approach on Iran and the possibility of going back to the nuclear deal. Netanyahu has already made it clear that he would oppose any improved plan, and the support of the IDF chief carries considerable weight in both political and diplomatic circles. Biden and senior members of his administration certainly remember the disagreements between Netanyahu and Israel's security leadership a decade ago (former IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and Mossad head Meir Dagan) about the possibility of Israel attacking Iran's nuclear facilities. Now, they are facing a political-defense phalanx that at least outwardly includes Mossad director Yossi Cohen, as well as others.

We can assume that Kochavi thought very carefully before choosing to insert himself – and thereby, the IDF – into what looks like an inevitable clash between Jerusalem and Washington over the Iranian issue. We should hope that his remarks won't cast a pall over relations with the top American defense echelon, which have always been maintained even during times of diplomatic disputes. There are a number of Israeli defense officials who think that it would have been better if Kochavi had said what he did to the Americans behind closed doors to avoid conflict, especially at such a sensitive time. This is the opinion of, among others, Defense Minister Benny Gantz and Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi, as well as many high-ranking IDF officials, all of whom think Israel should be in discreet talks with the new US administration in an attempt to influence any future agreements it might reach with Iran.

Israel would prefer that the US not return to any agreement with Iran and keep up the Trump administration's policy of "maximum pressure," even though hopes that the Iranian regime would collapse turned out to be false and this past year Iran has even stepped up its nuclear program, considerably shortening the time it needs to develop a bomb. As part of this activity, Iran has installed advanced centrifuges at its nuclear facilities in Natanz and Fordo, amassed a large quantity of low-level enriched uranium, and even started to enrich uranium to 20%.

US President Joe Biden and senior members of his administration have already made it clear that they intend to go back to the nuclear deal while at the same time recognizing how dangerous Iran and promising not to allow it to develop a nuclear bomb. The current disagreement on the Israeli side has to do with the best approach to take with the new administration in an attempt to reach optimal results. Past experience shows us that a contrarian approach is unlikely to be the right tactic, especially when the new administration is focused mainly on domestic issues and less on the problems of the Middle East.

Nevertheless, Kochavi's remarks were also intended for an Israeli audience. The Iranian challenge he presented – and the operational plans it demands – cost money. A lot of money. Readiness to counter the threat is the reason for the IDF's request for billions of shekels more for its budget, which would go mainly to armaments, intelligence, and training. Netanyahu and Gantz support the request, so it's likely it will pass, but at a time of economic distress and worse economic blows yet to come, they have an obligation to ensure that the IDF uses the money for its intended purpose and avoid wasteful spending, a mission in which the IDF has not always excelled.

 Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post IDF chief's message to Biden: If necessary, Israel will act alone appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Iran's declaration on Jan. 3 that it has begun enriching uranium to the 20% level at its Fordo underground nuclear facility is part of the Islamic Republic's drive to improve its bargaining position vis-à-vis the incoming Biden administration, a former Israeli defense official has told JNS.

"Their idea is to gather bargaining chips ahead of the nuclear talks," said Col. (res.) Udi Evental, senior research fellow at the Institute for Policy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

"They want to create pressure leverages for future talks, and they felt this is the right timing. It does not expose them to American retaliation, and it is a 'proud' national response to the killings of [former Al Quds Commander] Qassem Soleimani and [former head of the military nuclear program] Mohsen Fakhrizadeh," he added.

Evental has served as the former head of the Strategic Planning Unit of the Political-Military and Policy Bureau of the Israeli Defense Ministry, and was also Israel's intelligence attaché in Washington. He has held multiple positions in the Intelligence and Planning directorates of the Israel Defense Force.

Ultimately, he argued, Iran is telling the Biden administration to follow up on its promise to remove sanctions and return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – the 2015 nuclear deal—or else face continued Iranian nuclear progress.

"The Iranians likely took this decision in recent days after discussions. The central goal is to remove sanctions. An escalation with the US does not serve that logic," said Evental.

A return to the nuclear deal would, however, pave the way for Iran to become a nuclear threshold state, he warned. In seven years, when JCPOA's main limitations begin to expire, there would be no constraints on the quality and quantity of uranium enrichment centrifuges that Iran could possess or how much uranium it could enrich.

"They could get to almost zero breakout time with full international legitimacy. This is why it's a bad agreement, and must be repaired, though this is easier said than done," he said.

Iran is also extremely keen to rescue its economy, which has been ravaged by U.S. sanctions over recent years, meaning that it is interested in an immediate return to the deal signed between it and leading international powers.

While a return to JCPOA would not cancel out Iran's nuclear know-how gained through the research and development of advanced centrifuges in violation of the agreement, Tehran is ready to roll back all of its violations in exchange for full sanctions relief.

'No longer bound by any restrictions'

Evental noted that this is not the first time that Iran enriched uranium to 20%. In 2012, after Iran amassed 190 kilograms of uranium that was enriched to the 20% level, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned at the UN General Assembly that further progress by the Iranians would cross an Israeli red line.

"For one atomic bomb, the Iranians need to take 230 to 250 kilograms of uranium enriched to 20%, and turn this into few dozens of kilograms of 90% (highly enriched uranium)," he said.

Currently, the Iranians are indicating that they are going to produce 8 to 9 kilograms of 20%-enriched uranium per month, he said, adding that this is a slow pace below the real capacity of the Fordo plant. "Under these conditions, it will take Iran almost two years to accumulate enough uranium for one nuclear device, which leaves plenty of time for negotiations," explained Evental.

He said he had been expecting this Iranian step for a while, especially after the Jan. 3 drone-strike assassination of Soleimani by the United States. "In May 2019, they announced the beginning of violations of the nuclear agreement through five gradual steps. Their fifth step was made in January 2020, a year ago, when they announced that they are no longer bound by any restrictions."

Meanwhile, questions remain over Iran's potential retaliation to the killings of Fakhrizadeh, which it blames on Israel, and Soleimani.

Evental noted that the United States has pulled out all the stops when it comes to deterring Iran, sending B-52 bombers to fly over the region as well as a submarine, and keeping an aircraft-carrier strike group in the Persian Gulf.

 Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The Iranians, who seized a South Korean oil tanker on Jan. 4, continue to threaten revenge against both Israel and the United States.

"The Iranians probably have plans to conduct terror attacks, but they do not want an uncontrolled escalation," said Evental. "One risk is that in Iraq and elsewhere, Iran's proxies could seize the initiative, and that could escalate."

While neither Iran, the United States or Israel want a military escalation, that does not preclude an escalation dynamic from developing, he cautioned, although all sides will try to avoid this.

An Iranian attack against an Israeli target over the Fakhrizadeh assassination is more likely than an attack on the United States, he assessed, noting that the Israel Defense Forces has pointed to the risk of missile attacks from Iraq or Yemen, where Iran arms its proxy organizations with advanced capabilities.

Still, Israel is itself creating a deterrent posture against Iran.

'We have to prepare for this risk very seriously'

On Dec. 21, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Avivi Kochavi issued a stark warning, stating, "Lately, we've noticed a rise in Iranian threats against the State of Israel. If Iran and its partners, members of the radical axis, either directly or by proxy, will take action against Israel, they will find themselves in a very costly endeavor. The IDF will strike all those involved in activities against the State of Israel or against Israeli targets, whether in part or in full, whether near or far. … I advise our enemies not to test us."

It remains unclear whether such a warning is sufficient to deter Iran from attempting a terror attack overseas.

The United Arab Emirates reportedly arrested a squad of Iranian terrorists planning attacks on the anniversary of Soleimani's assassination, and many Israeli tourists are visiting the country.

"We have to prepare for this risk very seriously," said Evental. "Iran also has sleeper cell networks in Europe. It is certainly a threat. They believe that if harmed, it is their right to attack. It doesn't have to lead to an escalation in their perception, and that could undermine stability."

During a visit to the Israeli Navy's Commando Unit last week, Defense Minister Benny Gantz stated that "Iran is continuing to set the region alight with instability and chose to raise the level of its enrichment to 20%. Iran is a global challenge, and we, too, have our eyes open. We all must cooperate in the struggle against Iran, in its regional terrorist activity and the risk of Iran arming itself with a military nuclear program."

The Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA) released a statement on Tuesday saying that "though Iran has progressively escalated its violations of the JCPOA since [US] President [Donald] Trump withdrew from it in May 2018, this latest move represents the biggest nuclear escalation by Tehran in a decade."

JINSA assessed that "Iran's breakout window will shrink quickly as its 20% LEU stockpile grows, dwindling from around four months to potentially as little as two months by mid-2021."

It added that "the move to 20% enrichment also marks a major but subtle shift in Iran's counter-pressure strategy."

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org

The post 'Iranian regime is seeking leverage for future nuclear talks' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

A 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers is being eroded and efforts to revive the pact face a new challenge with the killing of Tehran's top nuclear scientist.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

The accord's restrictions on Iran's atomic work had one objective: to extend the "breakout time" for Tehran to produce enough fissile material for a bomb, if it decided to make one, to at least a year from about two to three months.

Iran maintains that it has never sought nuclear weapons and never would. It says its nuclear work only has civilian aims.

Tehran began breaching the deal's curbs last year in a step-by-step response to President Donald Trump's withdrawal from the deal in May 2018 and the reimposition of US sanctions.

This has shortened the breakout time but reports by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which polices the deal, indicate that Iran is not moving ahead with its nuclear work as fast as it could.

European states have sought to save the nuclear deal, pressing Tehran to comply even as Washington has tightened sanctions, and holding out hopes of a change in US policy once President-elect Joe Biden takes office on Jan. 20.

Biden was part of the US administration under Barack Obama that negotiated the 2015 deal.

What has Iran done so far?

Iran has contravened many of the deal's restrictions but is still cooperating with the IAEA and granting inspectors access under one of the most intrusive nuclear verification regimes imposed on any nation.

Enriched uranium: The deal limits Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium to 202.8 kilograms, a fraction of the more than eight tonnes it possessed before the deal. The limit was breached last year. The IAEA report in November put the stockpile at 2,442.9 kilograms.

Enrichment level: The deal caps the fissile purity to which Iran can refine uranium at 3.67%, far below the 20% achieved before the deal and below the weapons-grade level of 90%. Iran breached the 3.67% cap in July 2019 and the enrichment level has remained steady at up to 4.5% since then.

Centrifuges: The deal allows Iran to produce enriched uranium using about 5,000 first-generation IR-1 centrifuges at its underground Natanz plant, which was built to house more than 50,000. It can operate small numbers of more advanced models above ground without accumulating enriched uranium. Iran had roughly 19,000 installed centrifuges before the deal.

In 2019, the IAEA said Iran had begun enrichment with advanced centrifuges at an above-ground pilot plant at Natanz. Since then, Iran started moving three cascades, or clusters, of advanced centrifuges to the underground plant. In November, the IAEA said Iran had fed uranium hexafluoride gas feedstock into the first of those underground cascades.

Fordo: The deal bans enrichment at Fordo, a site Iran secretly built inside a mountain and that was exposed by Western intelligence services in 2009. Centrifuges are allowed there for other purposes, like producing stable isotopes. Iran now has 1,044 IR-1 centrifuges enriching there.

How close is Iran to having a bomb?

The breaches lengthened the breakout time but estimates still vary. Many diplomats and nuclear experts say the starting point of one year is conservative and Iran would need longer.

David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector who tends to have a hawkish position on Iran, estimated in November that Iran's breakout time could be "as short as 3.5 months", although this presumes Iran would use 1,000 advanced centrifuges that were removed under the deal.

What more would Iran need to do?

If Iran accumulated sufficient fissile material, it would need to assemble a bomb and probably one small enough to be carried by its ballistic missiles. How long that would take exactly is unclear, but stockpiling enough fissile material is widely seen as the biggest hurdle in producing a weapon.

US intelligence agencies and the IAEA believe Iran once had a nuclear weapons program that it halted. There is evidence suggesting Iran obtained a design for a nuclear weapon and carried out various types of work relevant to making one.

Tehran continues to grant the IAEA access to its declared nuclear facilities and allow snap inspections elsewhere.

Iran and the IAEA resolved a standoff this year that had lasted several months over access to two suspected former sites.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Explainer: How close is Iran to producing a nuclear bomb? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

US President Donald Trump has recently been considering an attack on Iran's uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, the New York Times reported Tuesday.

Trump made the request during an Oval Office meeting on Thursday with his top national security aides, including Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, new acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller and General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a US official said.

 Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The meeting was held a day after a UN watchdog report showed that Iran continued to violate the 2015 nuclear deal, from which Trump withdrew in 2018, by moving advanced centrifuges from an above-ground site to one located underground.

"He asked for options. They gave him the scenarios and he ultimately decided not to go forward," the official said. The White House declined comment.

According to the NYT, Trump decided to back off from the idea for fear that a strike would lead to a wider conflict in the weeks before his term in office was due to end.

Throughout his presidency, Trump has urged an aggressive policy against Iran, and in 2018 withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal.

Alireza Miryousefi, spokesman for Iran's mission to the United Nations in New York, said Iran's nuclear program was purely for peaceful purposes and civilian use and Trump's policies have not changed that. "However, Iran has proven to be capable of using its legitimate military might to prevent or respond to any melancholy adventure from any aggressor," he added.

Iran's 2.4-ton stock of low-enriched uranium is now far above the deal's 202.8 kg limit. It produced 337.5 kg in the quarter, less than the more than 500 kg recorded in the previous two quarters by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Report: Trump asked for options for Iran attack appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On Tuesday, the IDF's Military Intelligence Directorate submitted a document outlining its security and defense projections for 2020, which said that while the chances a war would be launched against Israel were low, there was a mid-to-high risk that events north of the border could devolve into a war.

The 2020 assessment was updated following the US airstrike that killed commander of Iran's Quds Force, Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani. Military Intelligence sees the elimination of Soleimani as a restraining factor, but one whose full ramifications have yet to be understood. The IDF believes that Soleimani's successor, Maj. Gen. Esmail Ghaani, will find it very difficult to fill Soleimani's shoes.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

According to the assessment, Soleimani's absence will have a direct effect on Israel. He was in charge of Hezbollah's precision missile project as well as the plans to imbed Shiite militias in Syria. Now Shiite states will have to make decisions about the future of those initiatives. The IDF thinks that the militia project will proceed, while Hezbollah's missile project could be shelved if Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah concludes that it is more trouble than it is worth. MI says that Hezbollah currently has very limited precision missile capabilities, and that they are not yet operational.

The IDF assessment for 2020 also notes that Nasrallah is not seeking a war with Israel, but is willing to fight one to protect "the equation of deterrence" north of Israel. MI thinks that continued "between-wars" action by Israel could lead to a response, which could have greater potential to devolve into a larger-scale conflict than responses in the past. However, the military assesses that in light of Soleimani's killing, Israel should step up its military activity against Iran's attempts to entrench itself in Syria and elsewhere.

The IDF assessment also touched on domestic matters in Lebanon and Iran, saying that both nations would continue to be bogged down in political and economic troubles this year.

Tehran is living off reserves

American sanctions on Iran have led to a significant drop in Iranian oil sales (from 2.8 million barrels per day two years ago to some 300,000 barrels in December 2019) and have dealt a serious blow to the Iranian economy, which is based mostly on oil revenues. The result is that Iran is blowing through its currency reserves and is finding it difficult to offer its citizens hope. Nevertheless, the IDF sees the Iranian regime as "stable" and successfully handling the recent wave of popular protests.

The IDF assessment says that in 2020, Iran will be forced to make some tough decisions given the economic crisis and internal dissent, including whether and how to proceed with its nuclear program. While Iran has thrown off the limits it accepts as part of the 2015 nuclear deal, the IDF thinks that Tehran is operating in a manner that will allow it to avoid going too far and keep some bargaining chips ahead of negotiations for a new agreement.

The IDF also warns that if Iran decides to move ahead with its nuclear program, by the end of the year it could enrich enough uranium to build a nuclear bomb. However, it would need another year to achieve military nuclear capability. The IDF assessment stressed that Israel is tracking Iran's nuclear program with more intensity to ensure that Iran is not working in any "secret channel" that is unknown to the West.

Closer to the border, the IDF believes that Syria will continue to present challenges to Israel mostly in the Iranian context. Syrian President Bashar Assad is busy trying to complete his capture of the last two pockets of resistance to his regime, after which he will be busy trying to rebuild his country. The Syrian army has already begun a process of rebuilding that includes new purchases of weapons and is renewing its work on chemical weapons, as well as biological weapons to a lesser extent.

A change in Syria

Amid the backdrop of Syria's desire to rehabilitate the country and Iran's current struggles, the IDF sees an opportunity for strategic change in Syria, even to the point of expelling the Shiite axis. This would require intervention and arrangements between the US and Russia, which wants to deepen it foothold in the region. Although Israeli officials aren't noticing a change in the Americans' desire to reduce their Middle East presence, for the time being, at least, US influence in the region is growing, primarily but not only due to the deterrence established by the Soleimani assassination. The Americans' main challenge in the coming year will remain in Iraq, where the fight over the US military presence will continue.

On the Palestinian front, the intelligence points to opposite trends: the possibility for stability in Gaza against the potential for destabilization in Judea and Samaria. The IDF believes that in the coming year Hamas will continue adhering to its understandings with Israel, in the hope that doing so will improve Gaza's economic situation. With that, Hamas will not accept conditioning any further understandings on the release of Israeli prisoners and bodies of IDF soldiers it is holding, and also won't agree to limit its armament efforts.

In Judea and Samaria, the IDF is again sounding the alarm over the possibility of a strategic turn of events, with "potentially dangerous" ramifications for Israel. This could happen as a result of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' departure and the consequent battles over his succession, or as a result of Hamas possibly winning the planned general election in the PA. The terror threats from Judea and Samaria will not subside, and although they are expected to be lesser in scope, they will be more professional and potent in nature.

New projects

In its annual assessment, MI also points to the growing challenges on the cyber and social media fronts – both in terms of Israel's operations against its enemies and vice versa. In the coming year, the IDF intends to significantly increase its work in a variety of projects and subjects related to the field of information technology and how it can be used for intelligence gathering purposes. In its report, however, the IDF admits that it will continue struggling to predict economic developments and grass-root social shifts.

The post 'By end of 2020, Iran will have enough uranium for a nuclear bomb' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.