Israel Expects US Attack on Iran Within Weeks Amid Diplomatic Stalemate

Israeli assessments indicate a growing likelihood of renewed conflict with Iran in the coming weeks, driven by stalled diplomatic efforts and ongoing U.S. and Israeli military preparations. Security experts suggest U.S. President Donald Trump may decide to launch a new offensive before the new U.S. Congress convenes in January, though questions remain about the objectives and feasibility of eliminating Iran's nuclear program.

According to Israel's Channel 12, the probability of renewed attacks has increased following Knesset elections and preceding U.S. midterm elections. President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a conversation on Saturday amid escalating tensions with Tehran. Raz Zimmt, head of the Iran Program at Tel Aviv University's Institute for National Security Studies, believes Trump will conclude that waiting for an Iranian response is futile within days or a few weeks. Zimmt anticipates Trump will aim to act before the new U.S. Congress begins its term after the midterms.

Former Israeli security official Avner Vilan considers war potentially inevitable, despite neither side desiring it, due to widening gaps between Washington and Tehran. He stated that the divide is significant enough that another round of attacks might be necessary to compel Iran to change its stance. Former Deputy Head of the Israeli National Security Council for Nuclear Affairs, Rafi Meron, noted that Iran's diminishing control over the Strait of Hormuz increases pressure, potentially pushing it towards developing nuclear weapons. Meron explained that control of Hormuz was Iran's primary asset, comparable in value to nuclear weapons, and that reduced control might lead Tehran to view nuclear development as its only remaining path.

Israeli assessments of a potential new offensive consider whether the goal would be to dismantle Iran's nuclear program or merely weaken its military capabilities in a limited engagement. Zimmt pointed out that previous U.S.-Israeli operations against Iran did not focus on nuclear facilities, stating that "almost nothing was done on the nuclear issue." He also mentioned indications of Iranian efforts to advance underground facilities like "Jabal al-Fas," but stressed a lack of immediate information regarding a looming nuclear threat.

Vilan, however, warned of a shift in Iranian rhetoric regarding nuclear weapons, noting public statements about potentially changing official strategy to develop nuclear arms for deterrence. He suggested that openly discussing these ideas, previously absent before the last war, could signify progress in similar discussions within Iranian decision-making circles. The report recalled Iran's past nuclear weapons development program, "Amad," which operated from 1999 to 2003 and was only revealed about a year after Tehran decided to halt it, according to Meron. Meron cautioned that Iran might surprise its adversaries with a nuclear test, stating that the possibility of Iran conducting a nuclear test in the desert "certainly exists."

A significant challenge for any military operation is the fate of over 400 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium, believed to be buried under the rubble of facilities targeted in June 2025 U.S.-Israeli operations. Destroying this material and hardened underground nuclear facilities would require a complex ground operation involving over a thousand commandos and heavy engineering equipment, facing risks from mines and explosives. Regarding Iranian retaliation, Israeli estimates suggest Tehran still possesses approximately 1,500 ballistic missiles that could be used against Israeli cities in a new confrontation. Zimmt explained this estimate is based on Iran retaining about half its long-range ballistic missile arsenal in underground tunnels, allowing continued launches despite previous strikes.

From the Iranian perspective, Vilan conveyed assessments from Tehran indicating that the leadership anticipates military strikes on leadership figures and vital facilities but believes these would not lead to regime collapse. These estimates suggest Iran would respond forcefully to any new attack without a fundamental shift in power dynamics or the internal political situation. Vilan framed the core issue as whether the Iranian regime would fall before acquiring nuclear weapons or succeed in developing them first, noting that "we may have pushed towards regime collapse, but we have given them a very big incentive to develop a weapon, and we see them doing it."

These assessments come as Trump has not made a public decision on resuming attacks. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio affirmed on Saturday that Washington remains open to a diplomatic solution, despite its readiness for further military operations. Iranian officials, meanwhile, have spoken of a change in Washington's tone and attempts to resume negotiations, alongside Iranian warnings against new attacks, amid ongoing disagreements over the terms for an agreement to end the conflict.