Ex-IDF Intel Chief: Iran Deal Possible, But Temporary; US-Israel Goals Differ
Translated & summarized from N12 by baba
Former Military Intelligence chief Tamir Hayman assesses that a deal with Iran is more likely than an attack, due to mediation efforts, but warns it's temporary. He stated that a joint Israeli-American strike requires shared goals, which currently differ between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump. Hayman also cautioned against allowing Iran to claim victory if a military operation occurs.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Former Military Intelligence chief Tamir Hayman sees a temporary trend towards a deal with Iran.
- Hayman warns that Iran is unlikely to compromise on core nuclear issues.
- He stated that a joint Israeli-American strike requires shared objectives, which are currently lacking.
- Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump have differing goals regarding Iran, according to Hayman.
- Hayman cautioned against letting Iran claim victory after any potential military operation.
Former head of Military Intelligence, Tamir Hayman, believes the pendulum is currently swinging more towards a deal with Iran than toward an attack, citing intensive mediation efforts and some flexibility from Iran. However, he cautioned that this situation is temporary and could revert to conflict.
Hayman explained that while Iran may be willing to accept incremental confidence-building measures, they are unlikely to compromise on core issues, such as the removal of enriched uranium. If this remains a sticking point, a military strike could become the likely path forward.
He stressed that a joint Israeli-American military operation should not commence without clearly defined, shared objectives. Hayman noted a potential divergence, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu aiming for regime change and President Donald Trump seeking to pressure Iran back into a deal. This lack of alignment, he warned, could lead to the operation's collapse.
Furthermore, Hayman questioned the effectiveness of previous actions and emphasized the need to define a different strategy for any renewed offensive to ensure different results. He also highlighted the critical importance of agreeing on an "exit strategy" to prevent Iran from dictating the terms of conclusion and claiming victory.
Mentioned
