Reserve Major General Tamir Hayman, former head of Israeli military intelligence and now chief of the Institute for National Security Studies, said Thursday that the new U.S.-Iran understanding falls far short of Israel’s war aims. Referring to the military campaign in which he served in reserve duty in Aman, he said, “If we had known this is how it would end, it would have been better not to start the war at all.”
Hayman argued that the memorandum gives Iran almost everything it wanted, preserving the regime and providing what he called an unusually generous economic lifeline. In his assessment, the deal also expands Iranian influence across the Middle East, including joint management of traffic in the Strait of Hormuz with Oman and responsibility for enforcing the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. He said that effectively merges the regional arenas, something Israel had tried to avoid.
On the nuclear issue, the main reason Israel and the United States went to war with Iran, Hayman said the framework contains two major commitments. Iran’s enriched material would be diluted, though the precise level and quantities remain unclear, and its nuclear program would be frozen immediately in exchange for freezing additional U.S. sanctions, even before any final deal is signed. He added that all clauses would be overseen by a new monitoring mechanism whose powers and details are still undefined, possibly including the IAEA.
Hayman said the arrangement is fragile and depends on Iran honoring its terms and on credible oversight. He said it is meant to stop Iran from rushing to a bomb or returning to the nuclear threshold it had reached before the 12-day war, but warned that only the release of technical details and a final signature will allow a full comparison with the Obama-era agreement.
