Recently, when missiles have been fired from Yemen by the Iran-allied Houthis, Israelis have received cellphone warnings 10 minutes before the air-raid sirens sounded.
This time things were different. Israelis awoke at 2:59 a.m. Friday to a high-pitched alarm, followed by a phone message from the Homefront Command to stay close their protective spaces.
As TVs turned on, the dramatic news unfolded: Israel was attacking its archenemy, Iran.
Why We Wrote This
Israel has long feared Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was geared toward developing a weapon. Now Israel has crossed the threshold of overtly bombing nuclear sites, inviting an Iranian response. Is U.S. diplomacy still possible?
Fearing that Iran’s decades-long nuclear enrichment program was geared toward development of a nuclear weapon, Israel has long considered carrying out a preemptive strike. But it has always been put off, because of the heavy toll that the war that is anticipated would result, with its regional implications, could take.
So why now?
Since the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Iran’s ally Hamas, what had been an Israel-Iran shadow war has come repeatedly into the open, including Israeli strikes that heavily damaged Iran’s air defenses in October 2024, leaving the much larger nation temporarily vulnerable.
In recent days, amid reports that Trump administration efforts to reach a deal with Iran on its enrichment program were reaching a stalemate, warnings of an Israeli attack proliferated.
Maxar Technologies/Reuters
The timing for such an attack was ripe, says Chuck Freilich, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv and a former deputy Israeli national security adviser. Iran and its regional proxies have been “dramatically weakened” since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.
“There’s a window of opportunity for attacking at hopefully a much lower cost than would have been in the past,” he says.
In addition, the U.S. administration under President Donald Trump has shown much more readiness to go along with an Israeli attack, even if there was an effort to reach a diplomatic deal to rein in Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
“Playing for time”
According to Sima Shine, head of INSS’ Iran program and former head of a Mossad research division, Israel became convinced in recent days that Iran was not serious in its negotiations and was “playing for time.” In a briefing with reporters, she said there was an understanding Iran had accumulated so much enriched uranium it could break out for a bomb in a very short time.
Israel’s attack will now most likely disrupt the U.S.-Iran talks, Professor Freilich says, but it may also increase Iran’s motivation to renew them.
A third point favoring an attack now is a political one, he says. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has “very clear political reasons for wanting to do this, because if it succeeds, it may be enough to save his political career,” which was badly tarnished by his government’s failure to fend off Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack.
Early Friday morning Netanyahu spoke to the nation, saying in response to a “clear and present danger,” Israel had no choice but to attack.
In recent years, Iran has produced enough highly enriched uranium for nine atom bombs, he explained, and in recent months has taken steps “to weaponize this enriched uranium.” He said Iran was also gearing up to produce 10,000 ballistic missiles within three years.
Intimating that Israel’s aims extended beyond Iran’s nuclear program, Mr. Netanyahu also directed remarks in English to Iranians, saying Israel’s fight was not with Iran’s people but its oppressive regime: “I believe that the day of your liberation is near.”
According to the Israeli military, more than 200 Israeli Air Force jets struck overnight in a “first stage” at military targets, nuclear targets and facilities, senior members of the Iranian general staff, and senior scientists of its nuclear programs. The strikes also targeted air defenses in western Iran and ballistic missiles.
Israel said its jets hit the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, the largest such site in Iran, damaging the underground area containing centrifuges, electrical rooms, and other infrastructure.
Israel said the strikes also killed the three most senior military commanders of the Iranian regime: armed forces chief of staff Mohammad Bagheri; Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Hossein Salami; and Gholam-Ali Rashid, head of Iran’s emergency command.
In retaliation, Iran launched over 100 UAVs toward Israel, many of which were intercepted on the way. “The threat isn’t over yet,” a military official said in a Zoom briefing. “These are complex days for the Israeli people.”
According to Israel Ziv, a retired general, the Israeli attack has already become a reality “game changer,” saying the United States should now use Israel’s latest military achievements to reach a “much more draconian” agreement with Iran.
The timing was right, he says, given the assessment that Iran’s weakness would not have continued forever and the fact that the 60-day deadline Mr. Trump had given the Iranians to reach a deal had passed. There is no doubt, he says, that the U.S. green-lighted the attack.
Targeting leadership
Hitting military leaders and nuclear scientists would help Israel attain a “much more significant achievement” than if it had targeted just the nuclear infrastructure, he says.
“They are also attacking the nuclear facilities, but it was not the first priority,” General Ziv says. The top priority of the surprise attack was to hit at top Iranian commanders and scientists who otherwise “would have disappeared.”
Israel and America’s “central motif” going forward, General Ziv says, should now not just be the nuclear issue, but the toppling of the current Iranian leadership as well. “We must break down all of the regime, the economy, whatever we can to make sure they cannot come back from this.”
Iran will likely retaliate with “whatever they have,” General Ziv says. But much of Iran’s arsenal has been damaged, “significantly” lowering the threat to Israel.
The INSS’ Professor Freilich also said the U.S. must use Israel’s strike to advance its nuclear talks with Iran, but added hopefully also a resolution of the Gaza war and Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians.
“We need a diplomatic agreement to achieve long-term change,” he says. “And of course, the really big question would be, if we had some … broader diplomatic endgame after this, certainly in Gaza, and maybe on the Palestinian issue as a whole.”
