Israel’s strategic options regarding Iran are at a critical juncture. The diminishing threat from proxies and the impairment of Iran’s air defense capabilities have shifted the focus squarely onto Iran’s nuclear program in the immediate time frame. Iran’s threatening public declarations and technical advancements are a red warning light.
For over a year, Israel has been defending itself on seven fronts in a war launched by Iran and its proxies. This effort has led to Iran losing on three fronts that it constructed around Israel – Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria. From four other fronts – Yemen, Iraq, the West Bank and Iran itself – Iranian attacks are ongoing.
During this time, the Israel Defense Forces severely damaged two of Iran’s primary proxy terror armies, Hamas and Hezbollah, which were designed to help surround Israel with a ring of firepower. In recent months, Israel traded blows directly with Iran twice, leaving it essentially without air defenses, and its missile production program significantly damaged.
As a direct domino effect from the damage Israel caused to the Iranian-led axis, and especially to Iran’s flagship proxy in Lebanon, Hizbullah, Sunni rebels in Syria identified a chance to launch a surprise offensive, resulting in the collapse of the Assad regime. Neither Iran nor Hizbullah were able to come to Assad’s aid, and the Syrian regime, a key pillar of the Iranian proxy program, fell apart in eleven days. Iran has seen its ring of fire around Israel collapse, and its vision for regional hegemony crumble.
Focus on the Nuclear Threat
Going forward, Israel now faces critical decisions regarding three main components of Iran’s hostile strategy: Its nuclear program, its plans to resurrect the proxy network, and its missile program.
Despite setbacks, Iran has not given up on its desire to rebuild its terror armies in Gaza and in Lebanon, break through to nuclear weapons and extend a nuclear umbrella over rebuilt proxies, and to directly threaten Israel with missiles and drones. The end goal, as the Iranian regime openly declares, is to lead to Israel’s collapse by the year 2040.
Yet the past year has only seen Iran’s strategy go backwards when it comes to its proxies and missile threats. The one exception to this trend has been the Iranian nuclear program, which continues to move forward at an alarming rate.
According to a November 21 report of the Institute for Science and International Security, Iran can produce more weapons-grade uranium since the last report of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in August 2024. This is due to increased stocks of enriched uranium and an enlarged advanced centrifuge capacity.
“Iran’s stocks of enriched uranium and its centrifuge capacity combined are sufficient to make enough weapons-grade uranium, taken as 25 kilograms per weapon, for almost ten nuclear weapons in one month, 13 in two months, 14 in three months, 15 in four months, and 16 in five months,” the report, co-written by weapons expert David Albright, stated. The figures speak for themselves regarding just how advanced the Iranian nuclear program is at this time.
The report also noted that “with Iran’s growing enrichment experience and using only a portion of its stock of 60 percent highly enriched uranium and only four advanced centrifuge cascades, Iran could produce its first quantity of 25 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium in one week or less. This breakout could be difficult for the IAEA to detect promptly, if Iran delayed inspectors’ access.”
The Iranian nuclear program therefore represents the first and most urgent decision point for Israel’s security cabinet. The decision is whether and when to take advantage of the fact that Iran’s air defenses are largely down and to strike key Iranian nuclear sites. The arrival of the second Trump administration could influence this decision significantly, with Israel likely to receive diplomatic support and, possibly, military assistance as well in this scenario.
The Iranian proxy threat, though now diminished, remains present through the activities of Iranian-backed Shi’ite militias in the region, and Iranian plans to rebuild its proxies in Gaza and Lebanon. These designs by no means threaten Israel only. The Iranian-orchestrated attacks on international Red Sea shipping – an affront to the entire world order – by the Houthis are ongoing.
Iran’s Messaging to Israel and the IAEA
Iranian officials have recently conveyed mixed messages regarding the prospect of further escalating direct military confrontations with Israel. On the other hand, they have issued stern, categorical warnings about their nuclear program, which should be taken seriously.
On November 19, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi threatened retaliation against Israel for its October 26 strikes targeting military installations in Iran. Araghchi stated that Iran would implement the “True Promise 3” plan against Israel at a time of their choosing, signaling a vague threat that leaves Iran plenty of room to delay its actions.
Iran’s nuclear chief, Mohammad Eslami, warned on November 14 of an “immediate reciprocal response” if the IAEA passes a censure resolution against Iran over its lack of cooperation. Eslami emphasized that Iran’s nuclear path is irreversible.
On November 22, a censure motion against Iran was brought by the US and the E3 (Britain, France, Germany) and passed at the IAEA’s 35-nation board, with 19 countries voting in favor. Iran said it would launch a series of “new and advanced” centrifuges in response. There is every reason to take this statement seriously.
Israel’s Two Main Options
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech to the Knesset on November 18, highlighted the progress that Israel had made against Iran’s three main threats. He confirmed that the Israeli Air Force had destroyed Russian-made air defense batteries around Tehran in the two waves of attacks on Iran, on April 19 and October 26 (both were in response to Iran’s firing of 300 missiles and drones in April and 200 missiles in October – two of the largest ballistic missile attacks in history).
“The test is on us – the Israeli government, the State of Israel, our friend, the United States… because if we do not deal with the nuclear program, then all of the other problems will bounce back, and resurface at the axis [a reference to the Iranian axis of proxy forces],” said Netanyahu.
Israel’s policy options boil down to whether Israel should take preemptive action to halt Iran’s nuclear advancements, potentially with diplomatic and military backing from the second Trump administration, or respond reactively to Iranian maneuvers (for instance, wait to detect Iranian nuclear breakout activity).
The assertive statements from Iranian officials signal an emboldened stance on continuing nuclear activities. Without proactive measures, Israel may face a nuclear-armed Iran in the near future, fundamentally altering the regional power dynamics and posing an existential threat. The threat to global security would be major.
The degradation of Iran’s air defense capabilities and proxy networks provides Israel with a strategic window to avoid this alarming scenario and argues for the preemptive strike option.
At the same time, Israel must maintain a long-term commitment to preventing Iran from rebuilding jihadist forces in Gaza and southern Lebanon.
American diplomatic and military support for all of these efforts will be essential for Israel’s success, and will play a key role in re-establishing regional stability.
