The New York Times on Thursday provided details that have not been previously disclosed regarding the circumstances of how and why Israel has declined to attack Iran’s nuclear program over the last several months, although many Israeli defense journalists, including from The Jerusalem Post, had prior knowledge of this but were unable to reveal the information.
Who leaked this story to the New York Times and why?
Former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, along with former defense minister Avigdor Liberman, who are rivals of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, all slammed him over the leaked story. They even alleged that Netanyahu leaked it in order to try to protect himself from political attacks for having talked tough but done little against Iran during this period.
Since October 2024, Bennett and Liberman have repeatedly called on Netanyahu to attack the Islamic Republic’s nuclear sites, while Lapid previously called on Netanyahu to strike Tehran’s oil fields.
However, when looking over the reporters involved in the NYT article, there were five names listed, and the lead reporters were American – not Israeli reporter Ronen Bergman, who was listed fifth.
This suggests that most of the reports came from leaks from American officials, though Netanyahu occasionally leaks directly to American journalists.
A Netanyahu leak?
To the extent that parts of the story may have come from Netanyahu, this would be to explain why he has not attacked Iran’s nuclear program by putting the onus on US President Donald Trump.
Insofar as parts of the story came from American officials, this could be both to message the US public about the complex dilemmas of negotiating vs attacking Iran and to convey a message to Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Regarding Khamenei, the message may also be dual – between letting him know how close he came in the recent past to watching his nuclear program burst out in flames and to how close Israel may be to attacking that program in the near future if no deal is cut.
One fascinating piece of the article was the open discussion on the potential deployment of Israeli commandos on the ground in Iran to tackle the country’s underground nuclear facilities.
Israel’s capability for attacking Khamenei’s nuclear facilities underground only became familiar to the public on January 2 of this year. That was when the September 8, 2024, Israeli commando operation against Syria was revealed. Even after that revelation, dropping hints that something similar could be done in Iran was often seen as off-limits for Israeli journalists or could only be done with vague hints.
As Iran asks itself whether the IDF might actually go after its nuclear sites directly, now Israel and America are threatening Khamenei more directly with this commando option.
Another option beyond a simple Israeli airstrike would be a joint Israeli-American airstrike, something which the article makes clear was vetoed for now but could be quickly restored as a possibility.
Iran is fearful of an Israeli airstrike but is even more fearful of a joint airstrike with Washington.
So, on the one hand, this article may be politically self-serving to Netanyahu and could be used to attack him for playing politics with potential classified war plans.
Alternatively, since Iran started to attack Israel directly in 2024, the Jewish state has been far more open about what it has done and can do to Iran in order to deter or intimidate Khamenei into nuclear concessions.
Whether these messages make a nuclear deal more or less likely and how much they may move Khamenei to make more significant nuclear concessions remains to be seen.
Jesus Christ is King
Comments are closed.