Israel Will Have to Hit Iran’s Nuclear Program ‘Over and Over Again’

Key Points – Israel’s massive, multi-wave air assault on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, which began on June 12th, is a strategically risky move that could lock Israel into a “forever war.”

-While the preemptive strike may set back Iran’s program in the short term, it has likely incentivized Tehran to sprint for a nuclear weapon at all costs, similar to North Korea’s path.

-This creates a dangerous cycle where Israel will be forced to repeatedly strike Iranian facilities (“mowing the grass”), a costly and unsustainable strategy against a large country.

-This new, active front adds to Israel’s existing security entanglements, further straining its resources and risking alienation of the US, which seeks to avoid another Middle East quagmire.

Nuclear Problems: Israel Might Have to Hit Iran Over and Over Again 

Israel has struck Iran with a massive, multi-wave air assault. At the time of this writing, it appears this may go on for days. This latest campaign is an effort to denuclearize Iran by force. It is also likely to spiral into a ‘forever war’ for Israel. Iran will almost certainly draw the lesson from this strike that it should have built a nuclear weapon instead of negotiating. The isolated nation will restart its nuclear weapons program after the current strikes halt.

Israel will then have to strike Iran again when Iran gets close to completing its bomb. This pattern could easily spiral into multiple cycles of construction and strike.

Iran Nuclear Program: There was a Deal Once

Israel has taken a considerable risk by undercutting negotiations and forcing this path. Under the administration of US President Barack Obama, there was a deal—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—which limited Iran’s nuclear capabilities. JCPOA capped Iran’s enrichment levels and included inspections. This concession is far more than other anti-western nuclear aspirants, such as North Korea or Pakistan, ever agreed to.

It did leave Iran with a nuclear program. Still, Iran was unlikely to give up its entire nuclear industry without massive counter-concessions the US, Israel, and their partners would never have accepted. Hawks insisted that the deal was terrible, but realistically, it was the best deal the US and Israel were likely to get, barring the use of force and all the new risks that entails. In fact, Trump, until this weekend, was feeling his way back toward something similar to JCPOA.

All that is over now. The obvious lesson for Iran—and other illiberal rogue states—from the airstrikes is to sprint for nukes. Don’t dither or deal because the US and Israel are going to renege anyway. Do what North Korea did: build them, threats and inducements be damned.

Then, when you have them, you can negotiate from a position of nuclear strength.

Mowing the Grass

With Iran now heavily incentivized to build nuclear weapons no matter the cost, Israel is now stuck with using force against Iran repeatedly whenever it closes in on the nuclear threshold. Israel will likely achieve its short-term goals with this strike.

Iran will need to move much more of its program underground. That will take years and cost a lot of money. It will also need to replace and better protect its nuclear scientists now being killed. This rebuilding, too, will take time and money.

But Iran is a large country—91 million people—and nuclear weapons technology is not that hard to acquire anymore. The base technology for a nuclear weapon dates to the 1940s, and there are proliferators, such as North Korea, who will help for money. In the medium term, Israel’s strike may worsen its security.

Israel will have to hit Iran again and again. This will be expensive. Iran will respond with better hardening and air defense, which may create prisoners in shot-down Israeli pilots. A constant air war will present regular opportunities for events to spin out of control.

US intelligence and munitions support will be critical for regular Israeli strikes to proceed, and it is unclear if even the very pro-Israel Trump administration wants to be pulled into forever air war with Iran.

Israel already practices this hit-and-hit-again strategy against the Palestinians, invading Gaza repeatedly. Colloquially known as ‘mowing the grass,’ it is unlikely that Israel alone has the capabilities to prosecute that approach against a large country significantly more powerful than the Palestinians.

Is an Omnifront Forever War Sustainable?

A cyclic forever air war with Iran only adds to Israel’s growing list of strategic entanglements. Israel is now fighting actively in Gaza and against Iran. It also occasionally strikes Yemen, Lebanon, and Syria. It faces insurgency-style resistance to its presence in the Golan Heights and the West Bank.

This reach is an extraordinary amount of fighting, especially for a democracy. More importantly, it is a massive drain on Israel’s economy and almost certainly unsustainable without extensive US support.

That support is still pretty strong, but Israel’s excesses in Gaza have divided the Democratic party. Support for Israel is no longer bipartisan; generational change in the Democratic party will turn it slowly against the special relationship. Worse, if Israel chain-gangs the US into its current war with Iran—a potentially massive US commitment to yet another Middle Eastern conflict—it will alienate the US foreign policy community and defense establishment.

Their cooperation is crucial for Israel to fight its omnifront forever war, and they absolutely do not want another US quagmire in the Middle East when China is the real threat to US preponderance.

Even Trump does not seem to want to get pulled into the current mess, which will hopefully communicate US limits to Netanyahu.

About the Author: Dr. Robert Kelly

Dr. Robert E. Kelly is a professor of international relations in the Department of Political Science and Diplomacy at Pusan National University in South Korea. His research interests focus on security in northeast Asia, US foreign policy, and the international financial institutions. He has written for outlets including Foreign Affairs, the European Journal of International Relations, and the Economist, and he has spoken on television news services including BBC and CCTV. His personal website/blog is here; his Twitter page is here.

Iran War

B-2 Bomber: How America Would Strike Iran

F-35I Adir: The Stealth Fighter Built to Attack Iran

F-16I: The Special Fighting Falcon Built for An Iran War