Former Israeli officials urge a strike on Iran before Biden leaves office
- Two former Israeli military officials suggest urgent airstrikes on Iran’s infrastructure.
- This plan arises as a response to the lack of U.S. administration intervention ahead of Biden's presidency.
- Israel views this as a critical moment to assert its security interests against Iranian threats.
In Israel, two former military officials, Kobi Michael and Gabi Siboni, proposed a military strategy advocating for airstrikes against Iran's nuclear, military, economic, and government infrastructure. This proposal, released as a policy paper by the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, outlines the urgency for Israel to act decisively before the political landscape in the U.S. changes under the incoming Biden administration. The officials believe that these strikes could cripple Iran’s capabilities and deter its ambitions of re-establishing a regional terrorist network, which Israel has been working to degrade amid ongoing tensions. Benny Sabati, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies, reinforced the argument for immediate military action, emphasizing that the current U.S. administration lacks the capacity or will to intervene, thus providing Israel with a unique opportunity. The proposed strikes are seen as not just a military necessity but also a strategic move to send a clear message to both the U.S. and Iran about Israel's commitment to thwarting any potential nuclear threat. This sentiment echoes remarks made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long asserted that Iran's nuclear ambitions must be staunchly opposed to ensure the security of Israel and the broader region. The analysis from Michael and Siboni is noteworthy as it contrasts with the broader environment of Israeli politics, where few leaders openly support such aggressive military strategies. Historically, Netanyahu's push for action against Iran met resistance from key security officials. Nevertheless, these former officials argue that the window for action is narrowing, and should Israel delay, they could lose a crucial opportunity to shape the regional balance of power before Biden assumes office. Furthermore, their perspective implies a shift in international dynamics where they anticipate that under Trump, the United States might be more amenable to Israeli military action compared to Biden's administration. This anticipated change is a critical factor in the urgency conveyed in their proposal. As tensions in the region persist, the consequences of acting—or failing to act—are significant for Israeli national security, and the discussion surrounding military strikes against Iran remains a contentious yet pressing topic.