logo
Israel's Iran strategy heavily banks on US getting good nuclear deal, sources say

Israel's Iran strategy heavily banks on US getting good nuclear deal, sources say

Yahoo02-07-2025
Israel also hopes that Trump can successfully place limits on Iran's ballistic missile supply, but this is even more uncertain.
Israel is feeling ascendant after its significant achievements against Iran during the June 13-24 war. Still, sources have said that the current strategy going forward is overwhelmingly banking on the US nailing Tehran down to a tough and long new nuclear deal.
If the US does not secure such an airtight deal, Israel is unclear on what its strategy or next steps would be.
In contrast to the ceasefire deal and end of the war with Hezbollah on November 27, 2024 which in and of itself set clear limits on Hezbollah's right to rearm and clearly outlined how Israel could proactively enforce those limits, the Iran ceasefire simply stopped the fighting between the sides with zero provisions regarding the future.
This lack of a clear plan and certainty is true about how much Israel thinks it can hold back the Islamic Republic from rebuilding its heavily damaged nuclear weapons program, and sources have indicated that the plan may even be less clear regarding imposing and enforcing limits on Iran's ballistic missile program.
Jerusalem's ideal world would be a US-brokered deal that ends Iran's nuclear program or ends its uranium enrichment and advanced centrifuges for a period of multiple decades, as well as keeps its quantity of ballistic missiles with a range to hit Israel down at the current 500-1,000 total missiles level.
But what if Iran only agrees to certain concessions, but not others?
For example, Iran could agree not to enrich uranium for the next year or two, during a period of time when it may not in any event be able to do so after the Israeli and American attacks, followed by enriching uranium at "low levels" like it did under the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal.
This would basically be accepting the offer that US President Donald Trump was offering them before the war, except now they would be "losing" nothing because they cannot, at least for some period of time, do very much uranium enrichment right now anyway.
Would Trump reject such a deal and potentially allow Iran to rebuild its nuclear program with no limits and no IAEA inspectors?
The part about the IAEA inspectors is not theoretical, as since June 13, the UN nuclear inspectors have had no access to any aspects of the Iranian nuclear program.
In fact, as of Wednesday, Iran also formally announced that it has indefinitely cut ties with the IAEA.
This does not mean that Jerusalem and Washington are blind about what is happening in Iran.
On Tuesday, The Jerusalem Post reported that Israeli satellites took tens of millions of photos of Iranian territory leading up to and ruing the 12-day war.
But wherever the IAEA had electronic surveillance, it had 24-7 surveillance even indoors, even underground, something which is difficult even for top intelligence agencies to achieve.
In short, IAEA inspections have never been sufficient by themselves, but they are crucial and invaluable.
If the world was partially blind regarding Iran's nuclear program when Iran rolled back cooperation with the IAEA in 2021 and again in 2022, it is truly blind now.
The only good news so far on the nuclear front is that even Iran is starting to admit that its nuclear facilities, including Fordow, were badly damaged.
This means that even if the world is blind, there could be several months or more of little new progress by Iran toward reconstituting its nuclear program, no matter how hard it tries.
Prior to the war, the Islamic Republic's ballistic missile program was not even on the table.
Now, Israel will try to inject it onto the table, arguing that Iran's three massive ballistic missile attacks on the Jewish state in April 2024, October 2024, and this month make it a new existential threat.
What if Trump settles for a nuclear deal, but with no limits on ballistic missiles?
Israel was worried about Iran building a facility which could jump its missile inventory from 2,500 to 4,000 in around a year or so, and to 8,800 in around two years.
Such numbers could overwhelm Israel's missile shield in a far more devastating way than even the 28 Israelis killed and 1,250 wounded from the 12-day war.
Presumably, then, Israel would attack before the numbers ballooned that much.
But how soon would Israel attack? When will the numbers get back to the pre-war 2,500 level? Earlier, such as when Iran builds and starts to operate a new ballistic missile production facility? Or yet earlier, as soon as it starts to build such a facility?
Or maybe Israel can agree to Iran building unlimited ballistic missiles as long as their range falls below the 1,500 kilometer range to hit the Jewish state, given that many Iranian missiles do fall below that range.
Will Jerusalem really risk ballistic missile attacks on hospitals, universities, and central Israel just to stop a facility from being built?
And if it won't, will it get harder to respond even as the process goes forward because Israeli leaders will need to admit they are afraid of the Iranian response?
Jerusalem has some time to let Trump try to resolve these issues.
But if Trump cannot resolve them in the coming weeks or months, Israel will likely need to make some clear, hard, and uncompromising decisions about being ready to enforce certain limits, with coordination with the US and a yellow light to strike, even if there is not full-throated approval.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Plans To Force Thousands Of USDA Workers To Leave D.C. Area
Trump Plans To Force Thousands Of USDA Workers To Leave D.C. Area

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump Plans To Force Thousands Of USDA Workers To Leave D.C. Area

The Trump administration plans to push thousands of U.S. Agriculture Department workers out of the Washington, D.C., region by forcing them to relocate to far-away offices if they want to keep their jobs. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced the plan in a press release Thursday, with her office claiming the move would 'better align' the agency 'with its founding mission of supporting American farming, ranching, and forestry.' Rollins said the department employs around 4,600 workers in the D.C. area, but by the time the transition is over, it plans to have 'no more than 2,000' left in and around the nation's capital. It also expects to close most of its buildings in the area, including a major research center. The D.C.-area employees would be transferred to 'hub' locations in Raleigh, North Carolina; Kansas City, Missouri; Indianapolis, Indiana; Fort Collins, Colorado and Salt Lake City, Utah, the agency said. Rollins acknowledged the move would create 'personal disruption for you and your families,' in a video directed at agency employees. 'This decision was not entered into lightly,' she said. Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, a union representing USDA workers, told HuffPost in a statement that the move would damage the agency. He noted that, despite common misperceptions, 85% of federal employees already live outside the Washington, D.C., region. 'But D.C. is the center of our nation's government for a reason, as it facilitates needed coordination between senior leadership and field offices and ensures agencies are at the seat of the table when decisions are made at the White House and in Congress,' Kelley said. He singled out the announced closure of the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center in Maryland as particularly misguided, calling it a 'crown jewel' for critical research. 'I'm concerned this reorganization is just the latest attempt to eliminate USDA workers and minimize their critical work,' Kelley added. The relocation proposal is reminiscent of a similar, controversial plan at the USDA from the first Trump presidency. In 2019, then-Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue announced that two agencies within the USDA would be relocated to Kansas City to save money and place employees in the Heartland. The move crushed morale and prompted many workers to leave rather than upend their families' lives; it also fueled a successful union organizing campaign among USDA staff. Mick Mulvaney, who had served as Trump's budget director, later boasted about how many resignations the plan had spurred. HuffPost reported earlier this year on how that move was still dogging the agency and its mission more than five years later. A USDA economist said the relocation plan appeared to be little more than a mass layoff in disguise. 'We had a lot of people who had spent their careers working on very specific fields — very niche questions,' the economist said. 'And when they left, it was so sudden and abrupt that there wasn't time to bring in the next generation. You had to just leave all of your work and go.' Rollins argued that pushing workers to other states would benefit the agency's work. 'President Trump was elected to make real change in Washington, and we are doing just that by moving our key services outside the beltway and into great American cities across the country,' she said. The proposal aligns with Trump's broader attacks on the federal workforce. Since taking power in January, the administration has gone to great lengths to push federal employees out of the government, either by firing them through legally dubious means, enticing them to leave through early retirement offers or making them so miserable that they decide to quit. More than 15,000 USDA employees took the administration's 'deferred resignation' proposal earlier this year, raising concerns about how it would continue to enforce food safety, administer agricultural programs and conduct critical research. In fact, so many chose to leave that USDA leadership had to encourage some to change their minds. Related... USDA Cuts More Than $1 Billion Earmarked For Local Food In School Lunches More Than 5,000 Fired USDA Employees Just Got Their Jobs Back Trump Has A Plan To Sabotage The Government — And It Worked Perfectly His First Term

US mulls limited authorizations for oil firms in Venezuela, sources say
US mulls limited authorizations for oil firms in Venezuela, sources say

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

US mulls limited authorizations for oil firms in Venezuela, sources say

By Marianna Parraga, Matt Spetalnick and Timothy Gardner HOUSTON/WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is preparing to grant new authorizations to key partners of Venezuela's state-run oil company PDVSA, starting with Chevron, which would allow them to operate with limitations in the sanctioned OPEC nation, four sources close to the matter said on Thursday. If granted, the authorizations to the U.S. oil major, and possibly also to PDVSA's European partners, would mark a policy shift from a pressure strategy Washington adopted earlier this year on Venezuela's energy industry, which has been under U.S. sanctions since 2019. A senior State Department official said in a statement they could not speak about any specific licenses to PDVSA's partners, but added the U.S. would not allow President Nicolas Maduro's government to profit from the sale of oil. The U.S. might now allow the energy companies to pay oilfield contractors and make necessary imports to secure operational continuity, two of the sources said. "Chevron conducts its business globally in compliance with laws and regulations applicable to its business, as well as the sanctions frameworks provided for by the U.S. government, including in Venezuela," a company spokesperson said. Though Venezuela and the U.S. conducted a prisoner swap this month, relations between the two countries have been tense for years, and the Trump administration has publicly supported opposition leaders who say their candidate won last year's election, not Maduro. Trump in February announced the cancellation of a handful of energy licenses in Venezuela, including Chevron's, and gave until late May to wind down all transactions. The U.S. State Department, which in May blocked a move by special presidential envoy Richard Grenell to extend the licenses, is this time imposing conditions to any authorization modifications, so no cash reaches Maduro's coffers, the two sources added. But Secretary of State Marco Rubio could still decide to ban the move at the last minute or modify the scope of the new authorizations. It was not immediately clear if the terms of the license that could be granted to Chevron would be reproduced for other foreign companies in Venezuela, including Italy's Eni and Spain Repsol, which have been asking the U.S. to allow them to swap fuel supplies for Venezuelan oil. The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Trump DOJ sets up ‘strike force' to probe unfounded Obama '16 vote claims
Trump DOJ sets up ‘strike force' to probe unfounded Obama '16 vote claims

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump DOJ sets up ‘strike force' to probe unfounded Obama '16 vote claims

President Donald Trump's Department of Justice has set up a 'strike force' to probe unfounded claims that former President Barack Obama illegally pushed allegations that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to boost Trump. Attorney General Pam Bondi said she's eager to 'investigate potential next legal steps' following the release of a report on the issue from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard that accused Obama of hatching a 'treasonous conspiracy.' 'We will investigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice,' Bondi said in a statement. Impartial analysts say there is nothing new in Gabbard's dossier and no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama. It doesn't refute the widely accepted fact that Russia sought to influence the 2016 campaign on Trump's behalf and against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Critics say administration officials are seeking to gin up new controversies to distract attention from the politically damaging calls for Trump to release more information on the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case. Trump has no secret of his intent to use federal law enforcement to suit his own personal and political interests, effectively rejecting decades of independence for the Department of Justice. Gabbard has claimed that newly declassified files prove a 'treasonous conspiracy' by the Obama administration in 2016 to politicize U.S. intelligence in service of casting doubt on the legitimacy of Trump's White House win. The intelligence chief cited emails from Obama officials and a 5-year-old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community's conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to boost Trump and denigrate Clinton. Russia's activities during the 2016 election remain some of the most examined events in recent history. Multiple bipartisan investigations, including one led by now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio, found that Russia sought to interfere in the election through the use of social media and hacked material. The evidence doesn't back the notion that Russia successfully hacked voting machines or rigged voting totals to help Trump and hurt Clinton. But Obama never claimed that it did, and publicly said there was no evidence of vote tampering in December 2020 as Trump prepared to take office for his first term. _____

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store