Why Israel Is Striking Iran Now — Strategic Timing, Geopolitical Calculation, and Legal Impunity

on

 

Executive Summary

Despite knowledge of Iran’s uranium enrichment since at least 2006, Israel has chosen to escalate direct military action against Iranian targets in 2023–2025. This paper outlines the strategic, political, and regional drivers of Israel’s current posture, emphasizing that the decision is not based on new evidence of nuclear weapons development, but on a perceived window of Iranian vulnerability. The escalation reflects both Israel’s domestic political imperatives and a broader alignment with long-standing U.S. strategic goals in the Middle East.

1. The Collapse of Iran’s Regional Deterrence Network

Iran has historically countered Israeli and U.S. threats through a non-nuclear deterrence architecture known as the "Axis of Resistance," consisting of:

  • Hezbollah in Lebanon

  • Syrian military and pro-Assad forces

  • Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq

  • Ansar Allah (Houthis) in Yemen

  • Palestinian factions (e.g., Hamas and Islamic Jihad)

Between 2023 and 2025, this network has been systematically dismantled:

  • The assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in September 2024 (AP News, 2024)

  • The fall of the Assad government in Syria following Israeli and U.S.-coordinated bombings (Reuters, Dec. 2024)

  • Targeted elimination of IRGC commanders in Iraq and Syria (Reuters, 2025)

  • U.S. airstrikes on Houthi missile systems in Yemen (Al Jazeera, 2024)

This erosion of Iran’s conventional deterrence has created an unprecedented opportunity for Israel to act without fear of symmetrical retaliation.

2. Iran’s Diplomatic Restraint and Momentary Weakness

In an effort to avert war, Iran returned to the negotiating table with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 2025. While the IAEA continues to raise concerns over uranium enrichment levels, it has not found conclusive evidence of weaponization (IAEA Reports, 2023–2025). The head of the leading intergovernmental watchdog for nuclear energy and atomic weapons has confirmed that the agency has not found “any proof” of an effort to obtain a nuclear weapon by Iran, lending yet more evidence contradicting Israel’s “self-defence” narrative for its war on the country.

Iran’s willingness to negotiate—despite being under military threat—has been interpreted by Israeli hardliners as a sign of weakness. This perception, combined with Iran’s loss of regional allies, has emboldened Israel to initiate strikes with little fear of full-scale retaliation.

3. Netanyahu’s Domestic Political Imperatives

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces mounting internal challenges:

  • Legal troubles and corruption trials

  • Public unrest over judicial reforms

  • Coalition instability due to disputes with ultra-Orthodox parties over military conscription

Launching a military campaign against Iran provides a short-term political rallying point, shielding Netanyahu from domestic dissent. Similar to how other embattled leaders have used war to consolidate power, Netanyahu appears to be instrumentalizing war for political survival (Haaretz, 2025).

4. U.S. Strategic Alignment and Tacit Support

While publicly urging restraint, the United States has provided logistical, intelligence, and military cover for Israeli operations:

  • Shared targeting intelligence in Syria and Iraq

  • Tolerance for Israeli airspace violations and cross-border assassinations

  • Passive diplomatic postures at the UN Security Council

Israel’s actions align with U.S. interests in:

  • Weakening Iranian influence in the Levant and Gulf

  • Disrupting Iranian support for Palestinian groups

  • Reinforcing U.S.-Israeli-Gulf alignment under the Abraham Accords framework

This is consistent with the long-standing U.S. policy of military primacy and containment of Iran. 

5. The Gaza War as Strategic Cover

The ongoing war in Gaza since 2023 has diverted global attention:

  • Western media have focused overwhelmingly on the Gaza conflict

  • International institutions have refrained from condemning Israel’s wider regional strikes

  • Axis of Resistance forces have been bogged down supporting Palestinian factions

Israel has used this distraction to launch deeper strikes into Syria, Iraq, and potentially Iranian soil itself. The Gaza war thus serves as a strategic diversion and enabler for the broader campaign against Iran.

6. Broader Strategic Goal: Regime Change in Iran

Beyond immediate security calculations, Israel’s long-term objective may be regime change in Tehran:

  • Economic sanctions have already strained Iran’s economy

  • Domestic unrest has risen since the 2022 Mahsa Amini protests

  • Disruption of regional alliances leaves Iran isolated

Israeli hardliners believe that sustained psychological, military, and economic pressure could fracture the regime internally, either through elite dissent or popular revolt.

Conclusion

Israel’s strikes on Iran are not about stopping imminent nuclear threats. They reflect a convergence of opportunity and ambition:

  • Iran’s deterrent system has collapsed

  • The regime is diplomatically and politically vulnerable

  • Domestic political needs push Netanyahu to act

  • U.S. support is assured, even if unofficial

  • The world is distracted by Gaza

The motivations mirror those that led to the Iraq War: perceived impunity, geopolitical calculation, and the manipulation of threat narratives.

References

  • United Nations Charter, Articles 2(4), 51

  • IAEA Reports on Iran, 2023–2025: https://iaea.org

  • AP News. "Israel Kills Hezbollah Leader Hassan Nasrallah." September 2024

  • Reuters. "Israeli Airstrikes in Syria and Iraq," 2023–2025

  • Al Jazeera. "U.S. Airstrikes on Yemen," 2024

  • Haaretz. "Netanyahu Eyes Iran War to Save Coalition," 2025

  • PNAC. "Rebuilding America's Defenses." Project for the New American Century, 2000

  • Ben Saul. "Israel and International Law," The Guardian, June 2025


Comments

Post a Comment