The Iranian-Israeli Confrontation: Q&A
The implications of the recent unveiling of the Iranian nuclear documents, along with the repeated attacks against select objectives in Syria, are not clear yet. In his weekly column, Amir Rapaport attempts to answer some of the pressing questions as yet another tense week draws to an end
Amir Rapaport
| 04/05/2018
PM Netanyahu's presents material on Iranian nuclear weapons development during a press conference in Tel Aviv (Photo: AP)
In July 2015, when Iran and the world powers signed the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), the Israeli political echelon ordered the Israeli intelligence agencies to make every effort to prove that Iran is fooling everyone and actually adheres to its original plan – to obtain a nuclear weapon. The task of obtaining unequivocal intelligence material was assigned to the Mossad and to the IDF Intelligence Directorate. Although the intelligence agencies were under no budget or personnel restrictions in connection with this mission, it was difficult to imagine an operation in the heart of Tehran that unfolds like a Hollywood thriller.
The Prime Minister, who earlier this week unveiled the operation which was concluded in January 2018, cast himself into the leading role. He made his announcement only 24 hours after foreign media sources reported that Israel had executed an attack – an astounding operational achievement in itself – against a bunker that contained 200 Iranian missiles, which could have been used to accurately hit any point within Israel.
As the week draws to a close, the implications of the recent unveiling of the Iranian documents, along with the repeated attacks against select objectives in Syria, are not clear yet.
Here are some questions and answers regarding the recent dramatic developments (and those expected soon).
What are the considerations in favor of and against the unveiling of the Mossad operation in Tehran?
Netanyahu's "show" was a highly unconventional move, as far as the intelligence world is concerned. If we set aside considerations that are not directly associated with security (notably public opinion in Israel), we will be able to list various reasons for and against Netanyahu's move. The main reason in favor is, naturally, Netanyahu's attempt to bring about the revocation of the JCPOA by arguing that the Iranian leaders are hopeless liars. The revelation also contributes to the prestige of the Mossad and to Israeli deterrence.
On the other hand, some even more amazing past operations (including operations staged in the context of the efforts to prevent the Iranians from achieving a bomb) have never been publicized (and it is doubtful whether they will ever be publicized).
Generally, every detail concerning the operation that is being publicized will help the Iranians carry out a thorough analysis of the omission (on their part). Even if heads do not roll in Iran (quite literally), the Iranians will do everything they can to prevent similar operations in the heart of Iran, based on the findings. Additionally, the recent unveiling has needlessly humiliated the Iranians in public. This humiliation provides an emotional reason for the Iranian intelligence services to initiate an act that would restore their dignity.
As far as the actual intelligence material is concerned, it is unclear whether the contents are enough to convince anyone that Iran does not conform to the JCPOA of July 2015. A number of former senior members of the Israeli top defense echelon, some of whom have been in office until recently (like Major Generals [res.] Yitzhak Ben-Israel and Amos Gilad and the former Head of the National Security Council, Uzi Arad), even argued, earlier this week, that the fact that Netanyahu failed to present any conclusive evidence of a violation of the agreement even supports the Iranian claim that they have fully conformed to the agreement since it was signed.
Incidentally, this correlates with Israeli estimates from 2015, according to which the Iranians will conform to the agreement for a number of years, as their "nuclear threshold state" status serves them well as it is.
On the other hand, even if the documents provide conclusive proof of a violation of the agreement, the Tehran documents left a lasting impression on numerous capitals worldwide, and could finally place on the table Iran's ballistic missile project – not just the nuclear weapons to which it aspires.
In any case, the recent publication, which was closely coordinated with the Americans, could be of service to US President Donald Trump if he decides not to extend the JCPOA on May 12.
So what are the scenarios as to the developments expected on May 12?
In fact, the primary issue on the agenda for May 12 is not a decision regarding the revocation of the JCPOA. On this date, a Presidential Executive Order from the days of the Obama administration, which suspended the sanctions prescribed by law against Iran (sanctions imposed owing to Iran's nuclear project) will expire.
President Trump has already extended the Executive Order several times, but announced that he does not intend to extend it again. This caused the leaders of the European powers to attempt and mend some loopholes in the nuclear agreement (like freezing the ballistic missile project) so as to convince President Trump to reconsider and extend the Executive Order. Prime Minister Netanyahu dropped his "bomb" at the high point of the negotiations between the superpowers.
Another extreme scenario is for President Trump to give up at the last moment, and continue to suspend the sanctions on the basis of the existing nuclear agreement. On the other hand, it is possible that President Trump will order a revocation of the agreement, and the Iranians, for their part, will expel the UN inspectors and announce that they are renewing their nuclear project.
Dr. Uzi Arad estimated, in a conversation with Israel Defense, that what actually takes place on May 12 "will be somewhere in the middle." According to Arad, even if President Trump does not extend the Executive Order on May 12, the Iranian interest will not be one of bringing about the revocation of the JCPOA.
"It is possible that they will announce some steps of symbolic significance, like starting to enrich uranium to 20%, but they would avoid any dramatic moves like expelling the inspectors, which would lead to tangible global sanctions being imposed on them immediately. Within that space, nothing dramatic is expected to happen on May 12 – neither on the part of the superpowers nor on the part of Iran," says Arad.
Is there a connection between the issue of the Tehran papers and the nuclear program and the reports regarding the additional attacks in Syria?
Yes. Apparently, Israel has taken into consideration the fact that while the world waits for the decision regarding the nuclear agreement, Iran's hands are tied more tightly than usual, so it is an opportunity to increase the pressure exerted on it in Syria.
Regardless, the developments in Syria have escalating dynamics of their own. It is very likely that at least some of the missiles that were attacked (according to foreign sources) had been brought into Syria only recently, as a very tangible threat on the part of Iran on any point within Israel, pursuant to the previous rounds in which Israel had allegedly attacked Iranian objectives inside Syrian territory.
If the reports regarding the latest attack were correct, it would seem that cutting-edge weapons have been used to attack the missile stockpiles. The rebel organizations in Syria do not possess such high-quality weapons, so the fact that rebel organizations had assumed responsibility for the attack, as some media sources reported, seems to be incorrect.
In any case, unlike the attack staged about a month ago, in which seven Iranians were killed, this time official Iran has not blamed Israel publicly and has not pledged revenge (which does not mean that the Iranians would not avenge this attack or the ones that preceded it).
So, can we say that the confrontation with Iran has already evolved into a war?
For the time being, we are witnessing a process that has had almost no precedent in the history of the State of Israel, where the IDF is operating methodically and consistently to prevent the force build-up of an enemy, during the build-up process and even before that force has been employed.
If the Israeli cabinet held a secret discussion about it, it may indicate that Israel prefers to go to war with Iran before Iran has attained a nuclear bomb and before it has built up a substantial force in Syria – better sooner than later. In other words, the risk of a war of choice has been taken here, as if the Iranians deem fit – they could regard those attacks as a declaration of war on them.
Even if both parties are not interested in an all-out war (as is currently the case), past experience has shown that large-scale wars usually break out owing to a "misunderstanding" and miscalculation of the enemy's intentions, more than as the outcome of a structured plan.
In the case of an all-out war between Iran and Israel, what would the sector boundaries be?
It is very likely that pursuant to the attacks, the Iranians will slow down the construction of their bases in Syria – even if they do not announce that publicly. Otherwise, the escalation process is expected to continue. In the event of an all-out war, thousands of missiles will be launched at Israel.
Will Israel be content with attacks against targets in Lebanon and Syria? No one can say for certain. A few days ago, Minister of Defense Avigdor Lieberman said that in the event that Iran attacks Israel, Israel, for its part, will attack Tehran in response. This was a dramatic declaration and a change of the game rules, but at a time when an astonishing intelligence story chases an astounding attack – no one pays attention to spoken statements.
The implications of the recent unveiling of the Iranian nuclear documents, along with the repeated attacks against select objectives in Syria, are not clear yet. In his weekly column, Amir Rapaport attempts to answer some of the pressing questions as yet another tense week draws to an end
PM Netanyahu's presents material on Iranian nuclear weapons development during a press conference in Tel Aviv (Photo: AP)
In July 2015, when Iran and the world powers signed the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), the Israeli political echelon ordered the Israeli intelligence agencies to make every effort to prove that Iran is fooling everyone and actually adheres to its original plan – to obtain a nuclear weapon. The task of obtaining unequivocal intelligence material was assigned to the Mossad and to the IDF Intelligence Directorate. Although the intelligence agencies were under no budget or personnel restrictions in connection with this mission, it was difficult to imagine an operation in the heart of Tehran that unfolds like a Hollywood thriller.
The Prime Minister, who earlier this week unveiled the operation which was concluded in January 2018, cast himself into the leading role. He made his announcement only 24 hours after foreign media sources reported that Israel had executed an attack – an astounding operational achievement in itself – against a bunker that contained 200 Iranian missiles, which could have been used to accurately hit any point within Israel.
As the week draws to a close, the implications of the recent unveiling of the Iranian documents, along with the repeated attacks against select objectives in Syria, are not clear yet.
Here are some questions and answers regarding the recent dramatic developments (and those expected soon).
What are the considerations in favor of and against the unveiling of the Mossad operation in Tehran?
Netanyahu's "show" was a highly unconventional move, as far as the intelligence world is concerned. If we set aside considerations that are not directly associated with security (notably public opinion in Israel), we will be able to list various reasons for and against Netanyahu's move. The main reason in favor is, naturally, Netanyahu's attempt to bring about the revocation of the JCPOA by arguing that the Iranian leaders are hopeless liars. The revelation also contributes to the prestige of the Mossad and to Israeli deterrence.
On the other hand, some even more amazing past operations (including operations staged in the context of the efforts to prevent the Iranians from achieving a bomb) have never been publicized (and it is doubtful whether they will ever be publicized).
Generally, every detail concerning the operation that is being publicized will help the Iranians carry out a thorough analysis of the omission (on their part). Even if heads do not roll in Iran (quite literally), the Iranians will do everything they can to prevent similar operations in the heart of Iran, based on the findings. Additionally, the recent unveiling has needlessly humiliated the Iranians in public. This humiliation provides an emotional reason for the Iranian intelligence services to initiate an act that would restore their dignity.
As far as the actual intelligence material is concerned, it is unclear whether the contents are enough to convince anyone that Iran does not conform to the JCPOA of July 2015. A number of former senior members of the Israeli top defense echelon, some of whom have been in office until recently (like Major Generals [res.] Yitzhak Ben-Israel and Amos Gilad and the former Head of the National Security Council, Uzi Arad), even argued, earlier this week, that the fact that Netanyahu failed to present any conclusive evidence of a violation of the agreement even supports the Iranian claim that they have fully conformed to the agreement since it was signed.
Incidentally, this correlates with Israeli estimates from 2015, according to which the Iranians will conform to the agreement for a number of years, as their "nuclear threshold state" status serves them well as it is.
On the other hand, even if the documents provide conclusive proof of a violation of the agreement, the Tehran documents left a lasting impression on numerous capitals worldwide, and could finally place on the table Iran's ballistic missile project – not just the nuclear weapons to which it aspires.
In any case, the recent publication, which was closely coordinated with the Americans, could be of service to US President Donald Trump if he decides not to extend the JCPOA on May 12.
So what are the scenarios as to the developments expected on May 12?
In fact, the primary issue on the agenda for May 12 is not a decision regarding the revocation of the JCPOA. On this date, a Presidential Executive Order from the days of the Obama administration, which suspended the sanctions prescribed by law against Iran (sanctions imposed owing to Iran's nuclear project) will expire.
President Trump has already extended the Executive Order several times, but announced that he does not intend to extend it again. This caused the leaders of the European powers to attempt and mend some loopholes in the nuclear agreement (like freezing the ballistic missile project) so as to convince President Trump to reconsider and extend the Executive Order. Prime Minister Netanyahu dropped his "bomb" at the high point of the negotiations between the superpowers.
Another extreme scenario is for President Trump to give up at the last moment, and continue to suspend the sanctions on the basis of the existing nuclear agreement. On the other hand, it is possible that President Trump will order a revocation of the agreement, and the Iranians, for their part, will expel the UN inspectors and announce that they are renewing their nuclear project.
Dr. Uzi Arad estimated, in a conversation with Israel Defense, that what actually takes place on May 12 "will be somewhere in the middle." According to Arad, even if President Trump does not extend the Executive Order on May 12, the Iranian interest will not be one of bringing about the revocation of the JCPOA.
"It is possible that they will announce some steps of symbolic significance, like starting to enrich uranium to 20%, but they would avoid any dramatic moves like expelling the inspectors, which would lead to tangible global sanctions being imposed on them immediately. Within that space, nothing dramatic is expected to happen on May 12 – neither on the part of the superpowers nor on the part of Iran," says Arad.
Is there a connection between the issue of the Tehran papers and the nuclear program and the reports regarding the additional attacks in Syria?
Yes. Apparently, Israel has taken into consideration the fact that while the world waits for the decision regarding the nuclear agreement, Iran's hands are tied more tightly than usual, so it is an opportunity to increase the pressure exerted on it in Syria.
Regardless, the developments in Syria have escalating dynamics of their own. It is very likely that at least some of the missiles that were attacked (according to foreign sources) had been brought into Syria only recently, as a very tangible threat on the part of Iran on any point within Israel, pursuant to the previous rounds in which Israel had allegedly attacked Iranian objectives inside Syrian territory.
If the reports regarding the latest attack were correct, it would seem that cutting-edge weapons have been used to attack the missile stockpiles. The rebel organizations in Syria do not possess such high-quality weapons, so the fact that rebel organizations had assumed responsibility for the attack, as some media sources reported, seems to be incorrect.
In any case, unlike the attack staged about a month ago, in which seven Iranians were killed, this time official Iran has not blamed Israel publicly and has not pledged revenge (which does not mean that the Iranians would not avenge this attack or the ones that preceded it).
So, can we say that the confrontation with Iran has already evolved into a war?
For the time being, we are witnessing a process that has had almost no precedent in the history of the State of Israel, where the IDF is operating methodically and consistently to prevent the force build-up of an enemy, during the build-up process and even before that force has been employed.
If the Israeli cabinet held a secret discussion about it, it may indicate that Israel prefers to go to war with Iran before Iran has attained a nuclear bomb and before it has built up a substantial force in Syria – better sooner than later. In other words, the risk of a war of choice has been taken here, as if the Iranians deem fit – they could regard those attacks as a declaration of war on them.
Even if both parties are not interested in an all-out war (as is currently the case), past experience has shown that large-scale wars usually break out owing to a "misunderstanding" and miscalculation of the enemy's intentions, more than as the outcome of a structured plan.
In the case of an all-out war between Iran and Israel, what would the sector boundaries be?
It is very likely that pursuant to the attacks, the Iranians will slow down the construction of their bases in Syria – even if they do not announce that publicly. Otherwise, the escalation process is expected to continue. In the event of an all-out war, thousands of missiles will be launched at Israel.
Will Israel be content with attacks against targets in Lebanon and Syria? No one can say for certain. A few days ago, Minister of Defense Avigdor Lieberman said that in the event that Iran attacks Israel, Israel, for its part, will attack Tehran in response. This was a dramatic declaration and a change of the game rules, but at a time when an astonishing intelligence story chases an astounding attack – no one pays attention to spoken statements.
