Why an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear sites is still possible: expert analysis

The postponement of the Israeli Defense Minister’s trip to Washington Yoav Gallantwho was supposed to meet with the US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austinmeans that Netanyahu’s government has not yet made a decision on retaliation for the missile barrage it was targeted on October 1, according to Israeli media citing sources “familiar with the situation”.

The unexpected cancellation of interviews face to face between the two ministers raises the hypothesis that Israel could opt for the attack what he wants most and what the US really doesn’t want. President Joe Biden has said publicly that he opposes the attacks nuclear sites Of Teheran. Netanyahu and Biden are expected to speak on the phone later today.

So far, Austin and Gallant have argued about whether to target the infrastructure military and Iranian intelligence, air defenses and energy facilities. Nothing about possible nuclear targets. But the Israeli government has amply demonstrated in the last year that it has no qualms about making decisions independently.

In theory, Israel has the ability to attack major Iranian nuclear sites on its own. But the operation would be difficult and very risky, if for no other reason reasons logistics. And even a successful attack would likely not stop its major enemy’s uranium enrichment program. Indeed, perhaps it would accelerate the race towards the atomic bomb. Of course, it would greatly fuel uncertainty in the entire region and the risk of all-out war. Forcing Washington into an unwanted intervention.

You need the most powerful weapon

“Causing large-scale damage to Tehran’s nuclear program would require a significant military operation and would likely involve the United States,” he tells Fanpage.it Darya Dolzykova researcher at the Royal United Service Institute (Rusi) in London, one of the most important think tank for defense and security. “The danger is that of one escalation regionalwhich would push Iran to equip itself withatomic weapon“.

The main plant is that of Natanzwhich also has a workshop for assembling centrifuges necessary for enrichment. Then, in importance comes the implantation Fordow. The former has its crucial areas in a deep underground bunker. The second is dug inside a mountain. Difficult to hit.

Not that Israel lacks weapons. “They could be used in the announced attack on Iran bomb anti bunker“, explains to Fanpage.it Ehud Eilamauthor of Israel’s Military Doctrine (Lexington Books, 2018), with a background in the IDF and as an analyst for the Ministry of Defense in Tel Aviv.

The armored shelter of Nasrallah in Beirut it was thirty meters deep. It was destroyed by Blu-109 anti-bunker warheads, experts agree. Probably mounted on Gbu-24 laser-guided bombs. The problem is that it took about eighty, the Israeli military leaked. How many would it take to penetrate the Natanz bunker or crack the Fordow mountain?

The only conventional weapon truly suited to the purpose is the Gbu-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (Mop), wrote the Financial Times. It is a precision-guided bomb about 6 meters long. It weighs more than 13 tons and can pierce the ground for 60 meters before exploding. It is supplied to the American armed forces. US parliamentarians have repeatedly proposed providing some to Israel. It is not known whether this actually happened or not.

I fighter-bombers with the Star of David they would not be able to take them under their wings, analysts point out. Perhaps military transport planes could be used. The old C-130s, suitably repurposed. The result, however, is dubious to say the least.

Strength and limitations of the Israeli Air Force

Ehud Eilan excludes the use of Jericho surface-to-surface missiles, launched from the ground: “They are less accurate and have less explosive payload than aircraft weapons.” For the attack on Iran, Israel will deploy its aviationsays the former researcher of the Ministry of Defense of the Jewish State.

The F-15I, F-16I and new F-35 are not afraid of enemy aircraft. “The Iranian Air Force relies on older aircraft such as F-14s and MIG-29s, which are no match for Israel’s modern fighter-bombers,” Eilam notes in a study. Out of 340 operational combat aircraft, the Air Force of Netanyahu should use at least a hundred of them, we read in a US Congress report.

The defense of Tehran, around siti nuclearwill rely mainly on missile systems, according to a study published by the expert. In particular the S-300 supplied to Iran by Russia. “Israeli planes would also use cyber attacks, to take adversary fighters and anti-aircraft systems by surprise.” An approach that “could benefit from discreet support from the United States”, underlines the expert. Not just with the guerra electronics. Above all, for refueling.

Because the weak point of the IAF, Israel’s air force, is the distance from targets. They are over a thousand kilometers beyond the border. To the limit of the autonomy of its planes. Delicate in-flight supplies would be needed. For which the Israeli capacity would perhaps be sufficient but very limited, based on the aforementioned US Congress report. The support of US air tankers would thus become indispensable.

For the IAF, the most direct route to attack Iran is through its airspace Jordan e Iraq. Another possibility is to pass on theSaudi Arabia. Jordan and the Wahhabi kingdom are not hostile to Israel. But relations with Arab countries in general will be put to the test. With the possibility of a strengthening of the alignment against Israel. Not to mention the possibility of disastrous Iranian reprisals on oil infrastructure, particularly those in Riyadh.

Iran is close to nuclear weapons

An attack on uranium enrichment sites Natanz e Fordow it wouldn’t stop Iran from building itself weapons atomicunless it caused massive damage. “Finally eliminating Iran’s nuclear program is probably not possible at this point,” he argues Darya Dolzykova. “The advanced expertise achieved by Tehran means that the destroyed parts could be rebuilt. Of course, depending on the level of damage, reconstruction could take more or less time.” In the event of damage to the ventilation intakes and surface systems, the time would be short. It is necessary to strike deeply. And devastatingly so.

The fact is that Iran has never been so close to having nuclear warheads. “Both intent and technical capability must be considered. Iran is believed to be capable of enriching enough weapons-grade uranium for a single nuclear weapon in about a week. However, the process of building a warhead and integrating it into a missile could take a few months.”

The narrative in favor of the use of nuclear weapons has become increasingly explicit over the past year, from Tehran’s politicians and military. The anti-nuclear fatwa issued by Ayatollah Khamenei in 2003 remains in force, at least officially, the CIA chief said recently. Willam Burns.

According to theInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in recent months Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% was 27 times higher than those officially allowed. They amounted to 87.5 kilos. For a single weapon, 55 kilos are enough. But there is very little information. The IAEA’s surveillance of Iranian nuclear activities is now completely insufficient.

The end of reasonableness

The clandestine work of Iranian scientists to achieve uranium enrichment of up to 90%, as needed for military purposes, has given rise to a long international crisis. Which seemed to be resolved with the 2015 Geneva agreement, signed by China, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the United States and the European Union. But in 2018, the then president of the United States, Donald Trump, he buried the agreement, reviving tensions. It is no coincidence that Trump, in the current election campaign, said he was in favor of Israeli action against Tehran’s nuclear sites.

Darya Dolzykova recalls how the sites have suffered repeated sabotage and damage through non-military means: “These actions, widely attributed to Israel, include physical and cyber attacks on Natanz and the assassination of Iranian scientists. Therefore, Israel may opt for similar non-military tactics to hinder Iran’s nuclear progress.”

Unfortunately, however, in the last year limits and reasonableness have been set aside. Israel’s legitimate right to defense and the necessary reaction to the pogrom of 7 October 2023 have often taken paths that are illegal, horrible in terms of civilian victims and extremely dangerous for the entire international community. A sensational blow by Israel with unpredictable but certainly dramatic consequences is anything but to be ruled out.