logo
Where is Israel's operation heading?

Where is Israel's operation heading?

BBC News5 hours ago

On Friday, after Israel launched an unprecedented attack on Iran, its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed Iranians directly. Speaking in English, he told them that the time had come for them to stand up against an "evil and oppressive regime".Israel's military operations were, he announced, "clearing the path for you to achieve your freedom".Now, as the military confrontation between Iran and Israel intensifies, and the range of targets widens, many are asking - what is Israel's real endgame?
Is it simply to end, as Netanyahu also declared on Friday on the first night of strikes, "the Islamic regime's nuclear and ballistic missile threat"?Was it also to finish off any more talks between the US and Iran, to reach a new negotiated deal to curb Iran's nuclear programme in exchange for the lifting of painful sanctions?Or could that message to Iranians about clearing a path to achieve freedom nod to an even bigger aim of trying to bring an end to Iran's clerical rule?
From generals to Trump: Who has his ear?
The political career of Israel's longest-serving prime minister has been marked by his personal mission to warn the world of the dangers posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran - from a cartoon of a bomb he's shown at the United Nations, to his repeated refrain during the last 20 months of a burning regional war that Iran was the biggest threat of all.American presidents and Netanyahu's own generals are known to have pulled him back, more than once over the years, from ordering military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.US President Donald Trump says he didn't give it a green light. But even what seems to have been at least an amber one seems to have been enough."Now he is in, he is all in," is how one western official described Netanyahu's game. He also underlined the view that Israel's main goal was to cripple Iran's nuclear programme.That decision has been widely condemned by states across the region, as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) whose Director-General Rafael Grossi underlined: "I have repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities must never be attacked, regardless of the context or circumstances." They have also been condemned by legal scholars who argue that the strikes are illegal under international law.But many are now asking whether Israel's prime minister is pursuing the same goals as his top advisors and allies.
"While Netanyahu has personally stacked his fortunes on regime change, the Israeli political and military establishment are committed to profoundly setting back Iran's nuclear program," says Dr Sanam Vakil, Director of the Middle East and North Africa programme at the Chatham House think tank."The latter might be difficult but somewhat achievable," she adds. "The former looks harder to deliver in a short and intensifying conflict."
Destroying Iran's nuclear programme
Netanyahu cast Israel's operation as pre-emptive strikes to destroy an existential threat. Iran's advance, he declared, was "at the 90th minute" towards the development of a nuclear bomb.Western allies have echoed his declaration that Tehran must not be allowed to cross this line. But Netanyahu's clock has also been widely queried.Iran has repeatedly denied it has decided to build a bomb. In March, Tulsi Gabbard, the US Director of National Intelligence, testified that the US intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon".The IAEA said in its latest quarterly report that Iran had amassed enough uranium enriched up to 60% purity - a short, technical step away from weapons grade, or 90% - to potentially make nine nuclear bombs.In these first few days, three key facilities in Iran's vast programme have been targeted - Natanz, Isfahan, Fordow. The IAEA has said that a pilot fuel enrichment plant, above ground, at Natanz was destroyed.The IAEA also reported that four "critical buildings" were damaged at Isfahan. Israel describes the damage to Iran's facilities as "significant"; Iran says it's limited.And Israel is also striking "sources of knowledge" by assassinating, so far, at least nine nuclear scientists and a growing list of top military commanders. Its list of targets, which includes military bases, missile launch pads and factories, is now widening to economic and oil facilities.Iran is also hitting back with its own expanding hit list as civilian casualties mount in both countries.
But to deal a decisive blow to Iran's vast nuclear programme, Israel would have to do significant damage to Fordow, its second-largest and most heavily protected site. The complex, deep underground in a mountain, is where some experts believe Iran has stockpiled much of its near weapons-grade uranium.Reports in Israeli media say the current aim is to try to cut off access to the facility.Israel doesn't have the bunker-busting bombs it would need to smash through so much rock. But the US Air Force has them. They're known as MOP – the precision-guided 30,000lb Massive Ordnance Penetrator. But it would still take many strikes, over many days, to cause major damage."I think the most likely scenario is that Netanyahu will call Trump and say 'I've done all this other work, I've made sure there is no threat to the B-2 bombers and to US forces but I can't end the nuclear weapons programme,'" Richard Nephew, former US official and Iran expert at the Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy, told the BBC's Newshour programme.A Western official told me, "It's still not clear which way President Trump will jump."
Timed to derail peace talks?
Trump keeps veering back and forth. At the start of last week, he urged Israel to stop threatening Iran militarily because an attack could "blow it" when it came to the nuclear negotiations with Iran he's always said he much prefers.Once Israel attacked, he praised the strikes as "excellent" and warned "there's more to come, a lot more". But he also mused they could help push Iran towards making a deal.Then in a post on Sunday on his Truth Social platform, he declared "We will have PEACE, soon, between Israel and Iran! Many calls and meetings now taking place."Iran's negotiators now suspect that the talks, which were set to resume in the Omani capital Muscat on Sunday, had all been a ploy to convince Tehran an Israeli attack was not imminent, despite mounting tensions. Israel's blistering salvos on Friday morning caught it off guard.
Others also see the timing as significant. "Israel's unprecedented strikes were designed to kill President Trump's chances of striking a deal to contain the Iranian nuclear programme," says Ellie Geranmayeh, deputy head of the Middle East and North Africa programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations."While some Israeli officials argue that these attacks aimed to strengthen the US leverage in the diplomatic path, it is clear their timing and large-scale nature was intended to completely derail talks."Officials with knowledge of these negotiations had told me last week that "a deal was within reach". But it all depended on the US moving away from its maximum demand for Iran to end all nuclear enrichment, even from much smaller single-digit percentages commensurate with a civilian programme. Tehran viewed that as a "red line".After President Trump pulled out of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal in his first term, partly under repeated urging from Netanyahu, Iran moved away from its obligation to restrict enrichment to 3.67% - a level used to produce fuel for commercial nuclear power plants - and started stockpiling too.In this second attempt, the US leader had given Iran "60 days" to do a deal – a window viewed by mediators with experience and knowledge of this field as far too small for such a complex issue.Israel attacked on the 61st day."The Oman channel is dead for the time being," says Dr Vakil. "But regional efforts are underway to de-escalate and find off ramps."
Netanyahu's 'Churchillian mood'
Viewed from Tehran, this escalation is not just about stockpiles, centrifuges, and supersonic missiles."They see it as Israel wanting to, once and for all, downgrade Iran's capabilities as a state, its military institutions, and change the balance of power between Iran and Israel in a decisive way, and perhaps topple the Islamic Republic as a whole, if it can," argues Vali Nasr, Professor of Middle East studies and International Affairs at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and author of the 2025 book Iran's Grand Strategy.It's unclear how the Iranian public might respond.
A nation of 90 million people has suffered, for years, the effects of swingeing international sanctions as well as systematic corruption. Protests have flared, year after year, on issues ranging from high inflation to low employment, shortages of water and electricity to the zeal of morality police restricting women's lives. In 2002, unprecedented waves of protests demanded greater freedoms; they were met by a harsh crackdown.Mr Nasr offers his assessment of the public mood now. "Maybe at the beginning, when four or five very unpopular generals were killed, they may have felt a sense of relief, but now their apartment buildings are being hit, civilians have been killed, and the energy and electrical infrastructure of the country is under attack," he says."I don't see a scenario in which the majority of Iranians are going to side with an aggressor against their country while it's bombing it, and somehow view that as liberation."But Netanyahu's statements keep hinting at broader targeting.
On Saturday, he warned his country will strike "every site and every target of the ayatollah regime".On Sunday, when specifically asked by Fox News if regime change was part of Israel's military effort, Israel's premier replied it "could certainly be the result because the Iran regime is very weak"."They want to play to the regime's fears of losing control as part of their psychological warfare," says Anshel Pfeffer, Israel Correspondent at The Economist and author of a biography of Netanyahu."The consensus within Israeli intelligence is that predicting or engineering the downfall of the Iranian regime is pointless. It could happen soon, or in 20 years."
But Mr Pfeffer believes the prime minister's thinking may be different. "I think there's a good chance that Netanyahu, unlike his spy chiefs, actually believes in the message; he is in a Churchillian mood."By Sunday evening, reports started appearing on US media, each citing their own sources, that President Trump had vetoed in recent days an Israeli plan to kill Iran's Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The buzz began when Reuters first broke the story quoting two anonymous US officials.Israeli figures questioned on their aims, from the foreign minister Gideon Sa'ar to the National Security Council Chief Tzachi Hanegbi, have emphasised their focus is not on Iran's political leadership. But Hanegbi added a coda – "but the concept of 'at the moment' is valid for a limited time."In the end, the contours of this endgame will be shaped by the course of a perilous and unpredictable confrontation, and an unpredictable US President."Success or failure is overwhelmingly being defined by whether the US can be dragged in," assesses Daniel Levy, President of the U.S. Middle East project and former Israeli government advisor. "Only the US can bring this to a timely end-point in the near future by determining outcomes and stop points."Top picture credits: Anadolu via Getty, ATEF SAFADI/EPA - EFE/REX/Shutterstock
BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why does Britain have a role in the Israel-Iran conflict?
Why does Britain have a role in the Israel-Iran conflict?

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Why does Britain have a role in the Israel-Iran conflict?

Britain has ordered RAF aircraft into the Middle East 'for contingency support across the region'. At the G7 summit, Keir Starmer also stressed that 'the constant message is de-escalate' and said he will bring whatever influence he can to encourage the entire group, and crucially the United States, to adopt such a stance. In recent weeks, notably at the United Nations, the UK has also taken a more critical attitude towards Israel's actions, especially over the conduct of the war in Gaza, while continuing to state that Israel has a right to defend itself. How much influence Britain still has on events in the region, however, is debatable… What does Keir Starmer want? He is conflicted. Sir Keir certainly doesn't want to see tensions in the region escalate, with all that implies for even more geopolitical instability and the spread of the current conflicts, both in the Middle East and in Ukraine, spreading further. Like the other G7 leaders, he will also be conscious that Taiwan remains highly vulnerable to an attack by China, which could take opportunistic advantage of the chaos to reunify the Chinese nation – a top priority for Beijing. There's also the ever-present internal instability in Syria and Iraq, in Yemen and Iran itself, and, less likely, Saudi Arabia. Economically as well as geopolitically, there's a lot at stake for a medium-sized open European economy dependent on the free passage of marine cargo through the Strait of Hormuz and on to the Suez Canal. Can Britain act unilaterally? Not really. UK arms exports to Israel are minimal, and to Iran, non-existent. The government has ruled out an embargo on spare parts for Israeli air force fighter jets. The cancellation of free trade talks with Israel was more symbolic than anything, and the same goes for the Israeli individuals sanctioned by the British government. Does Britain matter? To a surprising degree. Long past its imperial prime, the legacy of that era lives on in the minds of Israeli and Iranian leaders. Britain, in other words, looms larger in their consciousness than it has any right to, for mostly purely historical reasons. Why does Britain matter to Israel? Because it was the last imperial power in the former Palestine Territory, taken over from the Ottoman Empire after the First World War, and under British administration granted as a mandate from the League of Nations, then the United Nations. The proto-Israelis fought a war of independence against the British until they hurriedly withdrew and the UN partitioned it terribly. Only a few weeks ago, the Israeli foreign ministry made scornful reference to this background when it rejected British criticism of its government: 'The British Mandate ended exactly 77 years ago. External pressure will not divert Israel from its path in the struggle for its existence and security against enemies seeking its destruction.' It's also fair to say that events in the region have also affected British politics, notably in the internal affairs of the Labour Party, and the election of five independent MPs elected last July on a 'pro-Gaza' manifesto. Why does Britain matter to Iran? Also, for mainly historical reasons. For decades, certainly since 'Persia' emerged as a buffer between the Russian Empire and the Indian Ocean and the British Empire, and when oil became of strategic importance, the UK has sought to interfere in Iranian affairs. A key moment came when the American CIA and the British organised a coup against the then-prime minister of Iran in 1953, to protect Western oil interests with the help of the pro-Western Shah. However, there had been almost constant British military and political intervention for decades before. When the Islamic Revolution overthrew the Shah in 1979, America was called 'the Great Satan' and the UK 'the Little Satan', which denoted status for the British, at best. Naval skirmishes with Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, the imprisonment of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, and long-running disputes over money kept by the British after an aborted arms deal further poisoned relations in recent times. Where are the British popular? The Gulf kingdoms: close royal links, their taste for life in London, and the lingering legacy of Lawrence of Arabia have helped to foster a degree of warmth. And the future? Memories tend to run back a long way in the Middle East. Given that the British have had some sort of a colonial role in Cyprus, Egypt (especially in the Suez crisis), Sudan, Palestine/Israel, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Aden/Yemen, Iran and Afghanistan, sometimes reprised in more recent times, and not always recalled fondly, the UK will be a prisoner of its past just as much as any nation in the region for a long time to come.

Starmer and Trump to hold ‘one-on-one' talks at G7 in push to wrap up trade deal
Starmer and Trump to hold ‘one-on-one' talks at G7 in push to wrap up trade deal

STV News

timean hour ago

  • STV News

Starmer and Trump to hold ‘one-on-one' talks at G7 in push to wrap up trade deal

Sir Keir Starmer has said he will meet Donald Trump for 'one-on-one' talks at a major global summit in a push to get the US-UK trade deal over the finish line. The Prime Minister said he expected the economic pact to be completed 'very soon' ahead of a meeting with the US President at the G7 conference in Canada. Britain's long-coveted free trade deal with Washington was agreed upon last month but is yet to be implemented, with both sides yet to take the necessary steps to reduce tariffs. Asked whether he would be able to finalise the deal as he crosses paths with Trump at the international leaders' summit in Kananaskis, Starmer said: 'I'm very pleased that we made that trade deal, and we're in the final stages now of implementation, and I expect that to be completed very soon.' PA Media The deal with the US is said to be in the 'final stages' of implementation (Niall Carson/PA). Amid speculation that the two leaders will carve out time for a bilateral meeting between G7 plenary sessions, Starmer said: 'I'll be having a one-on-one with him. 'I think I'm seeing him on a number of occasions today because we're in all of the sessions together, so I'll be having a lot of conversations with President Trump.' He added: 'We will be talking about our trade deal… because that really matters for the vital sectors that are safeguarded under our deal, and we've got to implement that.' The Prime Minister is walking a diplomatic tightrope as he seeks to strengthen ties with Canada, the G7 host nation, while keeping the US president, who has repeatedly threatened to annex the country, on side. On Sunday, Downing Street confirmed efforts to revive stalled trade negotiations between London and Ottawa after a bilateral meeting between Starmer and Mark Carney. In warm words at the top of the talks, the UK leader challenged Trump's call for Canada to become a '51st state', speaking of the importance of Britain's relationship with the country as 'independent, democratic sovereign countries'. In recent months, the UK has held a series of engagements aimed at securing a reduction in the tariffs Trump imposed on Britain and the rest of the world on April 2. PA Media Starmer exchanged warm words with Mark Carney at the top of bilateral meetings on Sunday (Suzanne Plunkett/PA). Along with 10% tariffs on all British goods, the president imposed 25% levies on cars and steel. He later increased the tariff on steel to 50%, but gave the UK a reprieve, keeping its rate at 25% until at least July 9. Under the broad terms of last month's agreement, the US will implement quotas that will effectively eliminate the tariff on British steel and reduce the tariff on UK vehicles to 10%. The White House has also voiced concerns about plans to build a Chinese embassy near London's financial centres, with reports suggesting the issue has been raised in trade talks. The redevelopment proposals for the former site of the Royal Mint were called in last year, and ministers will now have the final say on whether the project goes ahead. On his way to the G7, Starmer was asked by reporters whether he was confident the matter would not undermine efforts to complete the trade deal, and whether US objections would be taken into consideration in the Government's decision-making. He said: 'We will act in our own national interest at all times on any issue including in relation to the embassy. 'We will carefully balance what is in our national interest in any decision that we take.' PA Media Sir Keir Starmer during a bilateral meeting with Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni at the G7 summit leaders' in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada (Suzanne Plunkett/PA). Starmer faces a busy week of diplomacy as leaders from the world's major economies descend on a luxury mountain lodge in the Rockies amid spiralling conflict in the Middle East and the war in Ukraine. As well as heads of government from Canada, the US, France, Italy, Japan, Germany and Britain, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky is also expected to attend the conference. The Prime Minister told reporters he had a 'good relationship' with the US president, which is 'important' at a time of heightened global instability. 'I've been saying, for probably the best part of six months now, we're in a new era of defence and security, a new era for trade and the economy,' he said. 'And I think it's really important for Britain to play a leading part in that, and that's what I'll be doing at the G7, talking to all of our partners in a constructive way. 'And I'm very pleased that I have developed good relations with all the G7 leaders.' He also warned that G7 allies would discuss imposing further sanctions on Russia if Vladimir Putin continues to resist calls for an unconditional ceasefire. 'My long-standing view is, we need to get Russia to the table for an unconditional ceasefire,' he said. 'We do need to be clear about we need to get to the table and that if that doesn't happen, sanctions will undoubtedly be part of the discussion at the G7.' Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country

Trump refuses to sign G7 statement amid split over Iran
Trump refuses to sign G7 statement amid split over Iran

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

Trump refuses to sign G7 statement amid split over Iran

Donald Trump torpedoed a joint G7 statement on the Israel-Iran conflict, according to senior US officials, as world leaders met in Canada on Monday. The agenda for the long-planned summit has been hastily updated to reflect cross-border barrages fired by Iran and Israel and concerns about a wider war. But signs of splits between Mr Trump and other leaders emerged rapidly on Monday morning. The Telegraph learnt that a draft document was circulated that called for both sides to protect civilians and for tight monitoring of Iran's nuclear facilities. That was unacceptable to Mr Trump, who is demanding that Iran is not allowed any uranium enrichment activity and who has been one of the most outspoken of Israel's supporters. 'I can confirm that he did not sign on to the statement,' said a senior US official. Organisers have gone out of their way to set an agenda and schedule that would reduce the chances of Mr Trump, a famously unpredictable leader, from going rogue. Mark Carney, the Canadian prime minister, who is hosting the event, is expected to issue a chairman's statement rather than the usual joint communiqué in order to reduce the threat of splits. Yet Mr Trump appeared to have upset even those limited plans before the first session had even started. As well as refusing to sign on to the Israel-Iran statement, Mr Trump said it had been a mistake to expel Russia in 2014 when Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea. 'I would say that that was a mistake, because I think you wouldn't have a war right now if you had Russia in,' he said, claiming that Russian President Vladimir Putin was 'very insulted'. His words will have alarmed European leaders in particular who hope he will sign off on a new, tougher package of sanctions on Russia during the summit. Mr Trump also floated the idea that China should be invited to join the G7, saying it was 'not a bad idea'. But the Prime Minister's official spokesman said that Sir Keir was 'happy with the make-up' of the current G7. Downing Street played down talk of splits over the Israel-Iran statement on the opening day of the summit, noting there is still time to find wording acceptable to all the leaders. Sir Keir Starmer said the G7 leaders shared a 'consensus for de-escalation'. The UK has also moved to indicate its disapproval at calls for regime change in Iran – something for which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is publicly calling. Asked if Sir Keir supported regime change in Iran, the Prime Minister's official spokesman said: 'Significant de-stabilisation of the region is in nobody's interest'. For its part, the White House made clear that the president's objective was to prevent Iran getting nuclear weapons. 'Under the strong leadership of President Trump, the United States is back to leading the effort to restore peace around the world,' said a White House official. 'President Trump will continue to work towards ensuring Iran cannot obtain a nuclear weapon.' Israel launched strikes against Iran on Friday, saying Tehran was on the brink of building a nuclear bomb. Since then, Iran and Israel have traded huge salvos, killing and wounding civilians and raising the spectre of a broader regional war. Mr Trump arrived in Canada on Sunday evening ahead of two days of talks. He has repeatedly said that Iran should return to the negotiating table in order to forge a deal that would see it give up its nuclear ambitions. Ahead of a meeting with Mr Carney, he confirmed reports that Iran was using backchannels to ask for talks, saying he had given Iran two months to reach a deal. 'They had 60 days, and on the 61st day, I said, we don't have a deal. They have to make a deal, he said. 'And it's painful for both parties, but I'd say Iran is not winning this war, and they should talk.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store