'If we must return, we will do so': Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz issues new Iran warning
Israel and Iran are currently upholding a ceasefire agreed in the wake of United States strikes against Tehran's nuclear facilities last month.
Prior to the Trump administration's intervention, both nations had exchanged missile and rocket fire for 12 days following what Israel called "preemptive" attacks to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.
While the ceasefire appears to be holding, Mr Katz on Thursday, local time, warned Israel remained prepared to resume hostilities in order to defend itself from harm.
"Israel's long arm will reach you in Tehran, Tabriz, Isfahan, and anywhere you try to threaten or harm Israel. There is no place to hide", he told an air force graduation ceremony, according to a statement from his office.
"If we must return, we will do so with greater force."
It was not immediately clear what Mr Katz defined as a threat to Israel, although it is likely any resumption of Tehran's nuclear program would likely be deemed worth of a response.
While US officials have been insistent Iran's nuclear facilities were "obliterated" by its attacks, little evidence has been made public to back up the claim.
Many analysts have acknowledged that while the strikes were successful, assessments of the damage could take months and would require intelligence from agents or assets inside the facilities.
As a result estimates over how far back Tehran's uranium enrichment program and other nuclear goals have been set back continues to be a subject of debate.
US officials claim Iran's nuclear ambitions have been set back years, possibly decades, while others, including the International Atomic Energy Agency, have suggested a timeline of months.
The United Nation's nuclear watchdog has also expressed ongoing concern about the location of almost half a tonne of highly enriched uranium, which remains unaccounted for following the conflict.
US officials, including President Donald Trump and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, have insisted the material was destroyed in the attacks on Iran's Fordow site.
Secretary Hegseth has also claimed there is no evidence Iran moved the material out of the facility before the strikes occurred.
However, the IAEA maintains there is still a chance some of the material was either moved or has been recovered from the site, with the watchdog urging Iran to allow inspectors into the facility.
Tehran, though, has refused to heed those calls, with the nation's regime also moving to suspend all cooperation with the nuclear watchdog going forward.
That move has sparked fears Iran could be seeking to restart its nuclear program immediately, potentially with the intent of quickly producing an atomic bomb as a form of deterrence.
With Reuters.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canberra Times
an hour ago
- Canberra Times
Aid lorries enter Gaza as Israel takes 'tactical pause'
UN emergency relief coordinator Tom Fletcher welcomed the announcement by the Israeli military. "In contact with our teams on the ground who will do all we can to reach as many starving people as we can in this window," he wrote on X.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The moral test for Labor has shifted on Gaza: Words are not enough
Just two months ago, the UN warned: 'Every single one of the 2.1 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip face the risk of famine. One in five faces starvation.' And we know many have been shot by Israeli soldiers while trying to get food. On the weekend, Israel announced it would take steps to restore aid. Sadly, by this stage it is difficult to know with what level of credulity to treat its government's assertions. Israel has long blamed Hamas for looting aid; on Sunday, The New York Times carried a report based on conversations with Israeli military officials: 'the Israeli military never found proof that the Palestinian militant group had systematically stolen aid from the United Nations … In fact, the Israeli military officials said, the UN aid delivery system, which Israel derided and undermined, was largely effective in providing food to Gaza's desperate and hungry population.' This backed reports of a recent American analysis with similar findings. The starvation of the people of Gaza, then, is not an accident; it is not a tragic byproduct of other actions. As de Waal wrote years ago, 'starve' should not be seen as a passive verb. It is something someone does to someone else. And, it follows, something that others permit to be done. Almost a year ago, one Israeli minister, Bezalel Smotrich, said: 'No one will allow us to starve 2 million people, even though that might be just and moral until they return the hostages.' He was wrong. Loading Wong's early call for restraint in Gaza tells us several things. It shows it was possible, at the very beginning, to glimpse some of what was coming. At the same time, Wong's early defensiveness shows how easily participants in public debate – including leading politicians – are able to be knocked off course by efforts to make certain statements unsayable. The conservative press is significant in these efforts; but the rest of the political class, politicians and media, are the ones who allow themselves to be cowed. Israel has achieved as much as it ever will from this war. In the doing, thousands more Palestinians have been killed. Together, these two facts mean that more things are now able to be said. But the moral and practical test for those with influence has shifted. Loading Of course, it's true that Australia can't by itself end the fighting. And it is hard to know what will make Netanyahu listen – or make America behave differently. And it is true, too, that statements can have some effect. The last time famine threatened in Gaza, international pressure led to an increase in aid. Obviously, though, this was only temporary. And that is why it is important to recognise that other options are available to Australia. The UK has now announced it is working with Jordan to deliver aid and will medically evacuate children. France has said it will recognise Palestine as a state, something former Labor ministers Gareth Evans, Bob Carr and Ed Husic are calling for here. On Sunday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made clear that Israel has breached international law. This was a welcome injection of clarity. Still, the test at this late stage is no longer whether politicians can issue damning statements. The only meaningful test left is whether our leaders will do everything they can to stop Netanyahu's Israel from killing any more Palestinians.
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
The moral test for Labor has shifted on Gaza: Words are not enough
Just two months ago, the UN warned: 'Every single one of the 2.1 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip face the risk of famine. One in five faces starvation.' And we know many have been shot by Israeli soldiers while trying to get food. On the weekend, Israel announced it would take steps to restore aid. Sadly, by this stage it is difficult to know with what level of credulity to treat its government's assertions. Israel has long blamed Hamas for looting aid; on Sunday, The New York Times carried a report based on conversations with Israeli military officials: 'the Israeli military never found proof that the Palestinian militant group had systematically stolen aid from the United Nations … In fact, the Israeli military officials said, the UN aid delivery system, which Israel derided and undermined, was largely effective in providing food to Gaza's desperate and hungry population.' This backed reports of a recent American analysis with similar findings. The starvation of the people of Gaza, then, is not an accident; it is not a tragic byproduct of other actions. As de Waal wrote years ago, 'starve' should not be seen as a passive verb. It is something someone does to someone else. And, it follows, something that others permit to be done. Almost a year ago, one Israeli minister, Bezalel Smotrich, said: 'No one will allow us to starve 2 million people, even though that might be just and moral until they return the hostages.' He was wrong. Loading Wong's early call for restraint in Gaza tells us several things. It shows it was possible, at the very beginning, to glimpse some of what was coming. At the same time, Wong's early defensiveness shows how easily participants in public debate – including leading politicians – are able to be knocked off course by efforts to make certain statements unsayable. The conservative press is significant in these efforts; but the rest of the political class, politicians and media, are the ones who allow themselves to be cowed. Israel has achieved as much as it ever will from this war. In the doing, thousands more Palestinians have been killed. Together, these two facts mean that more things are now able to be said. But the moral and practical test for those with influence has shifted. Loading Of course, it's true that Australia can't by itself end the fighting. And it is hard to know what will make Netanyahu listen – or make America behave differently. And it is true, too, that statements can have some effect. The last time famine threatened in Gaza, international pressure led to an increase in aid. Obviously, though, this was only temporary. And that is why it is important to recognise that other options are available to Australia. The UK has now announced it is working with Jordan to deliver aid and will medically evacuate children. France has said it will recognise Palestine as a state, something former Labor ministers Gareth Evans, Bob Carr and Ed Husic are calling for here. On Sunday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made clear that Israel has breached international law. This was a welcome injection of clarity. Still, the test at this late stage is no longer whether politicians can issue damning statements. The only meaningful test left is whether our leaders will do everything they can to stop Netanyahu's Israel from killing any more Palestinians.
