Is Israel waiting for the US election to make its biggest move against Iran?

As Tel Aviv continues to trade strikes and counterattacks with Tehran and its proxies — the latest being Iran’s October 1 firing of 181 rockets at targets inside Israel — the obvious question for many dedicated Middle East observers is why Israel does not simply eliminate. all of Iran’s nuclear facilities in the process because they are the biggest danger to it and its allies? There may also be an even more immediate danger than many think, as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned in May that Iran possessed enough material to produce at least three nuclear warheads. The only previous saving grace in this was that the Islamic Republic was further from having completed designs for the key technological elements of such a weapon — around nine months, according to a senior security source close to the Presidential Administration. of the USA and a close counterpart of the European Commission who was spoken to exclusively in the last month of OilPrice.com. However, this has now changed as very recent discussions at the highest levels of G7 governments highlight that Russia may now assist Iran in this in return for the missiles and drones that Tehran provides to Moscow for its ongoing war against Ukraine.

Related: Bad policies leave US vulnerable to Middle East oil crisis

There is certainly no obstacle to Israel striking Iran’s key nuclear sites because of a lack of information on the matter – Tel Aviv and Washington have long known exactly where all the major elements of Iran’s nuclear development program are. It is reasonable to assume that the main targets would include the large nuclear facilities at Natanz, Fordow, Esfahan, Arak, Parchin, Qom and Bushehr and the main uranium mines at Saghand and Qchine. Overall, Iran disclosed to the IAEA 21 sites related to its nuclear program during the period it was monitored, and there were other sites where the agency detected the presence of highly enriched uranium. It is believed that several additional sites that remained undisclosed to the IAEA by Iran have since been discovered by various intelligence sources. That’s a lot of places for the Israeli air force to attack, especially given the roughly 900 miles from their key operational airports to the most distant of these Iranian targets, compounded by how deep underground they’ve been located some of the sites. But could Israel successfully strike some of the largest sites, which would at least significantly delay Iran’s nuclear development timetable? According to a US Congressional Research Service (CRS) report dated September 28, 2012 (‘Israel: possible military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities”) the answer may be “yes”.

First, the air strike force should take off from a position that allows it the optimal air route from Israel to Iran. At the top of the list of such candidates would appear to be Azerbaijan, with whom Israel has developed much closer relations in recent years, including supplying weapons to retake Nagorno-Karabakh last year. Until then, according to US and EU sources OilPrice.com spoke to, Israel’s military presence in the country has increased dramatically, although further additions to Israel’s force there could be made by overflying the airspace of several countries NATO. This would avoid the more problematic routes involving Jordan and then Iraq or via Saudi Arabia. Second, they would need the right bombs to penetrate the defenses of deep underground facilities. Several of these sites are believed to be at least 300 feet away, compared to the 100 feet of the bunker where Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah was neutralized on Sept. 27 by 2,000-pound U.S.-made BLU-109 penetration bombs , so a greater measure. a powerful weapon would be needed. At the time of the 2012 CRS report, it highlighted that the US had already sold Israel the 2000lb ’27’ class and 5000lb ’28’ class Guided Bomb Units (GBUs). Crucially, however, he added that “the US could have quietly given Israel far more sophisticated systems, or Israel could have developed its own.” Apart from any other logistical considerations in such a major operation, it is telling that Iran clearly believes Israel could pull it off, as in April — shortly after the Iranian missile attack on Israel — Tehran shut down its facilities nuclear.

Such attacks by Israel on Iran’s key nuclear facilities are only one part of the equation, of course, the other being what Iran and its allies might do in retaliation. This seems to form the dividing line between the views of the current US president, Joe Biden, and his predecessor and current presidential candidate, Donald Trump. And while Israel could carry out the attack on the nuclear site without the US, managing the fallout on its own would be difficult. Especially in context, repeated barrages of Iranian missiles and drones aimed at a wide selection of targets in Israel would be extremely difficult for Tel Aviv to defend without US and UK air support, despite its Iron Dome missile defense system . According to a recent news report, satellite footage and social media showed that several Iranian missiles were able to penetrate the defensive shield and hit Israel’s Nevatim air base in the Negev desert, among other targets, in the previous missile attack on April 13. Any idea that Israel would be able to eliminate these missile sites at the same time as Iran’s nuclear ones seems highly unrealistic, given that not only are many buried deep underground, but also that many of the missiles are launched by to highly mobile launchers. It is possible that Israel may decide to take a chance on this in order to withdraw Iran’s nuclear program without full US support, but this is clearly the less preferred option.

Biden said last week that he is not in favor of Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear sites, and the key reasons appear to be the same as when President Barack Obama refused to accept such calls from Israel as well. Then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said back in 2011 that in such a case the US would be blamed and could also be the target of Iranian retaliation with attacks against its military or naval bases in the Middle East . There could also be actions by Iran and its proxies to cause economic hardship to Western Allies through attacks against key oil sites, as OilPrice.com recently analyzed. Moreover, Iran could be expected to push its supporters around the world to launch terrorist attacks on broader targets associated with the US in the West and East. This is why the Biden team continues to focus on tightening sanctions as the primary response to any increase in the scale of Iranian actions against Israel. This is also the view of the doves in Israel’s cabinet. Instead, the hawks take the view of Donald Trump, who said last week (in response to Biden’s emphatic no on Israel’s strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities): “It’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard This is the biggest risk we have. The biggest risk we have is nuclear… Soon they will have nuclear weapons. And then you’re going to be in trouble.” With that in mind, Israel could expect to make a big push against Iran if and when Trump is elected president.

By Simon Watkins for Oilprice.com

More top reads from Oilprice.com