Since the 1990s, Israel has kept a watchful eye on Iran’s claim of pursuing a “nuclear program for peaceful purposes,” a claim that includes uranium enrichment. The Iranian regime, under the leadership of its Ayatollah, has been vocal about its ambitions to “liberate Al-Quds (Jerusalem)” from what it refers to as the Zionist state, raising eyebrows and concerns in the international community.
During the Obama administration, a significant accord was struck between Iran and the so-called “P5+1”—the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany. This deal aimed to limit Iran’s uranium enrichment activities, with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) assigned to verify compliance. Yet, the IAEA has repeatedly reported Iran’s violations, including the concealment of certain sites from inspectors.
Fast forward to the Trump administration, which withdrew the United States from the agreement, opting instead for a strategy of stringent sanctions intended to cripple the Iranian economy. Critics had long questioned the efficacy of previous sanctions, but Trump’s approach was particularly aggressive: any government or multinational corporation engaging with Iran would find itself barred from doing business in the U.S.
The immediate fallout was palpable—currency plummeted, unemployment surged, and inflation skyrocketed in Iran.
As we transitioned into the Biden administration, there was a brief lull; Iran seemed to regroup and expand its influence, alongside its proxies in the Middle East, all while accelerating its nuclear ambitions. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sought to solidify its grip on the strategic Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, through its Houthi proxies in Yemen, Iran aimed to gain leverage over the Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Red Sea.
In a broader strategic vision, Iran aspired to create a “Shia crescent” connecting it to the Mediterranean, stretching from western Iran through northern Iraq and Syria, and extending to Lebanon. By 2022, it became evident that Iran wielded significant proxy influence in Iraq, much of Syria (with the Assad regime’s consolidation of power), and Lebanon, where Hezbollah had substantially undermined the formal government structure.
The situation escalated dramatically on October 7, 2023, when Hamas, acting as an Iranian proxy, launched an unprecedented assault on Israel. The following day, Hezbollah joined the fray, with the Houthis soon thereafter contributing to the chaos from Yemen. This series of events made it abundantly clear that Israel was the principal target of Iran’s grand design.
In retaliation, Israel launched decisive strikes against Hamas and Hezbollah, even targeting Syrian regime capabilities and air defense systems throughout Syria. This military campaign effectively cleared the skies between Israel and western Iran, setting the stage for Israeli Air Force operations. Amid these developments, the U.S. re-engaged in negotiations with Iran concerning its nuclear pursuits, during which Iran allowed the IAEA limited access to some facilities.
However, on June 9, 2024, the IAEA reported finding traces of synthetic uranium at three undeclared sites: Varamin, Marivan, and Turquzabad. Iran, notably, rebuffed requests for inspections at these locations. As Israeli intelligence indicated a marked acceleration in both uranium enrichment and ballistic missile development, alarms were raised. Trump had initially granted Iran 60 days to reach an agreement; when that deadline elapsed without resolution, Israel took action on the 61st day.
Since that pivotal moment, analysts and intelligence agencies have increasingly recognized that the roots of this conflict lead directly back to Tehran. While Israel’s focus remains on curtailing Iran’s nuclear ambitions, a broader threat looms large. Iran retains the capability to disrupt not only the Strait of Hormuz but also the Bab al-Mandab, with its ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel—nearly 1,800 kilometers away—and some models extending their reach up to 4,000 kilometers.
In response to these developments, Israel has also initiated offshore gas production near Haifa and is advancing the “East-Med Pipeline” project, which aims to connect the Eastern Mediterranean to Europe. As the Abraham Accords expand, possibly incorporating Saudi Arabia, the development of inland oil and gas pipelines could further link to the Mediterranean, ultimately supplying Europe and reducing Iran’s leverage over the Strait of Hormuz. This shift would also liberate countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain, and Qatar from the Ayatollah’s grip.
However, Iran’s ballistic missiles pose a dual threat: not only to Israel but potentially to Europe and, in the future, the United States as well. The ongoing negotiations with Iran boil down to three critical objectives:
- Dismantling its nuclear program
- Halting the production of ballistic missiles
- Suspending support for its proxies, or at least significantly curtailing their capabilities
Israel now stands at a crossroads, while the U.S. administration continues to reiterate its demands. Meanwhile, Western leaders increasingly favor a ceasefire, negotiations, and the immediate implementation of agreements. Iran, on the other hand, seems caught between clinging to its national pride and heading toward a self-destructive confrontation with Israel, the U.S., and their allies. For many Iranian leaders, the fear of losing power may outweigh the potential sacrifices in lives or military capabilities. Although they might perceive any significant setback as a blow to Khomeini’s Islamic Revolution of 1979, the ideological underpinnings remain intact, likely to resurface in a new guise.
Ultimately, the military objectives are straightforward: dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and cease ballistic missile production. While the air campaign has inflicted considerable damage on the NATANZ facilities, the deeply fortified Fordo facility—located almost 240 feet underground—poses a significant challenge for the Israeli Air Force. Despite the extensive destruction of launch facilities, there is no conclusive evidence that key production sites are either fully operational or completely decommissioned.
Rumors of potential regime change in Iran circulate within Middle Eastern media, and while such claims might seem outlandish, the U.S. and its allies would do well to take this possibility seriously. The deeply embedded ideology of the Ayatollah and his adherents is likely to sustain the regime as long as the clerics continue to propagate their beliefs.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of Gateway Hispanic.
About The Author
“`
