The Palestinian issue is not off the agenda. As long as the scope of terrorism was low, they talked in Israel in terms of conflict management. For the past year, it seems, the conflict has ruled us. The attack in which the deputy commander of the Nahal patrol Major Bar Falah was killed, who fell in an encounter with terrorists near the Jalma crossing, expresses the continued escalation in the Jenin area and northern Samaria.
In view of the inability and motivation of the Palestinian security mechanisms to take control of the situation, the heads of the army and the political decision makers are discussing the possibility of a military operation in the Jenin area and northern Samaria. In the past year, the Central Command and the IOS Division have been prepared for the possibility of launching a targeted operation lasting several days, but as far as the plans or desire for a short operation whose main purpose is to increase deterrence in the Jenin region are concerned, the security establishment has different positions regarding the effectiveness of such an operation, and regarding the question of whether it is Improve the situation or escalate it.
Compared to the eve of other major operations in Judea and Samaria at the beginning of the 2000s, this time it is not about terrorist infrastructures from institutions or the arrest of wanted persons who conduct large terrorist operations. The current number of targets is relatively low, so that in fact the last few months have been marked by confrontations with groups of armed youths who go out to shoot at IDF forces when making arrests. In the meantime, in the last month there has been another increase in people going out of Palestinian cities in an attempt to carry out shooting attacks against IDF forces , military positions and Israeli vehicles with an emphasis on buses.
As long as the attacks continue, the operation in Jenin is getting closer. Public pressure and the approach of the election date may have an impact, and the security establishment will be required to provide an objective assessment of the operational effectiveness of such an operation. It is necessary to thoroughly check if the operation in question has clear goals, a sufficient number of terrorist targets, and if it is possible to conduct this type of operation without it slipping into a wider escalation in other areas of Judea and Samaria.
Currently, the leading position in the security system maintains that at the current time, on the eve of elections in Israel, the operational objectives can be achieved even in the continuation of the series of night operations. However, to the extent that there are additional attacks that end in a serious outcome, the possibility of expanding the IDF’s activities until the operation in northern Samaria may materialize sooner than expected.
Nuclear elephant
The negotiations for a new nuclear agreement between the superpowers and Iran, it seems, have run aground and reached an impasse at this time. The Iranians are not ready to hear about the opening of the investigation files concerning the uranium findings found in facilities where enrichment activities were not supposed to take place. In Israel, the political echelon and especially the Prime Minister Yair Lapid, are ashamed of what they define as an achievement, and claim that Israel has a decisive role in presenting new intelligence. In addition, they claim in Jerusalem that political moves made behind the scenes have caused a hardening of the positions of the United States and European countries, and the current tripping of the agreement.
Beyond the doubt that this is indeed the picture of reality as it is presented in Israel, after the International Atomic Energy Agency also strongly demanded all along not to give up on the investigations, perhaps the Iranians in general are the big beneficiaries. It is possible that Tehran is seeking to delay time and continue to advance the uranium enrichment project in a reality where the surveillance cameras are completely turned off.
Even if we assume that the Israeli claim is true, it is difficult to explain how it serves foreign policy, when we also understand very well that the US wants to conclude an agreement with Iran, which will free up time for them to deal with other issues. As the immortal statement of Henry Kissinger, the legendary US Secretary of State “B and one of the most important statesmen in modern times, who stated that the State of Israel has no foreign policy, but only domestic policy. That is, the decisions in Israel are made first of all from considerations and internal political power relations.
As during Prime Minister Netanyahu’s time, so also with Lapid, the media and public line regarding the Iranian issue, especially in the midst of an election campaign, is seen as an electoral treasury from which political bills can be paid. The strategic question of whether it is good for Israel to place itself at the center of the matter or as the main reason why an agreement was not signed is another problem. The boasting of an apparent political achievement, which, as stated, cannot be proven, ignores the Iranian nuclear elephant that is meanwhile growing in size in the room, and is using the time to enrich uranium to high levels.
It seems that Israel has not yet formulated a decision on the question of what to do with this data and how to act in reality without an agreement. Israel must tell the Western countries what is possible within the framework of an agreement, and not just lead a hawkish line that in practice has so far not kept the Iranians from obtaining a nuclear bomb or brought Israel closer to the military and political ability to deal with this threat alone.
Compared to the Prime Minister, Defense Minister Benny Gantz leads a more moderate line with the Americans in this matter. He opposes the current agreement, and welcomes the hardening of European and American positions, but sees this as a smaller part of Israeli policy than Lapid. Gantz, like quite a few officials in the defense establishment, believes that in the situation that has arisen, in which Iran continues to advance in uranium enrichment without interruption, it is better to return to the framework of a bad agreement like the 2015 agreement, than to have no agreement at all.
The details of the latest agreement that were leaked and perceived as worse than the previous agreement, led him to align and officially oppose returning to the agreement under the existing conditions. More modestly, he attributes to Israel a much more marginal role in that the agreement at this stage was not signed, and recommends maintaining a less defiant line towards the Americans compared to the one led by Mossad head Dedi Barnea.
In the security establishment, as we also published in “Maariv”, all along the way they saw lower chances of signing an agreement compared to other political parties and the head of the Mossad, who saw the expected signing as an almost fait accompli. This assessment led, among other things, to a worsening of the official Israeli line against the agreement and even what was perceived as a sharp criticism on the part of Barnea towards the American administration.
Don’t jump in the head
The situation of uranium enrichment and the production of advanced centrifuges, which Gantz revealed this week at the “Jerusalem Post” conference in New York, is extremely worrying. According to him, Iran has increased the production of advanced centrifuges and is moving them to underground sites. According to the estimate he provided, Iran has the ability to obtain enough fissile material for three bombs within a few weeks. In a briefing for UN Security Council ambassadors, Gantz added that only at the Purdue facility – where, according to the agreement, uranium enrichment activities are prohibited – Iran has tripled its enrichment capacity.
The defense establishment believes that the transition to enriching uranium to the level of 90% required for a nuclear bomb does not involve a technical obstacle, but only depends on the decision, as Gantz himself stated in the various briefings. Gantz added that in a future agreement, Iran should be required to destroy the advanced centrifuges and not just store them, and at the same time, with or without an agreement, pose an international military threat led by the United States.
As of today, Iran is at its most advanced point in the nuclear program. It is true that in order to produce nuclear weapons, additional components are needed beyond uranium enrichment, but even before Israel asks for credit for stopping the negotiations on the nuclear agreement, it is required to ask if it is not Iran in general that seeks to postpone the signing of the nuclear agreement in order to further improve its opening conditions For further negotiations? Or maybe is she comfortable in the situation where she continues to advance in the field of uranium enrichment?
If a nuclear agreement is signed, Israel is right in its claim that Iran will have more money with which to finance its allies in the Middle East, but it must choose what to focus on. In Israel they want to bind the nuclear agreement together with the effect of this agreement on the stability situation in the Middle East, but the international attention to this is low. Even from the point of view of the Americans, the nuclear agreement deals only with the nuclear, while on the other things there is excellent cooperation behind the scenes, and it can be assumed that Israel can leverage additional requests for its military strengthening if an agreement is signed.
There are elements in the defense establishment who believe that Israel should not be the one to jump in and portray itself as the bad boy responsible for blowing up the negotiations. It should offer an alternative to a reasonable agreement, so that Iran, if it continues to torpedo the contacts, will be perceived as the one responsible for it. Israel will continue to lead the fight against Iranian entrenchment in our region Even in the coming years, regardless of the nuclear agreement, in recent months Israel has even increased the pace of attacks in Syria, and it seems that the Russians, who are preoccupied with their problems in Ukraine, are less preoccupied with stabilizing Assad’s rule.
But not only Israel is taking advantage of the situation to increase the pressure. Despite the actions attributed to the Air Force, the many attacks according to publications and the excellent intelligence, Iran is far from giving up. This campaign is constantly changing shape, and in this matter as well, the political level and sometimes in the IDF have tended to provide overly optimistic assessments of pushing the Iranians out of Syria. Also in these matters, public relations or a desire to leverage political achievements may affect the presentation of the situation.
The assessment of the defense establishment, which was also presented by the Minister of Defense during his visit to the US, according to which Iran has effectively taken over more than ten facilities of the military industry in Syria, expresses an adjustment that the Iranians are making after losing many shipments on the way to Syria. At those sites, Iran is serially producing IML advanced intended for use by it and its allies, in addition to similar facilities in Lebanon and Yemen. All these challenges will await the next government, but those who are looking for differences between the various governments in these issues will have a hard time finding any, even if they look in depth.
[email protected]