Israel still eyeing a limited attack on Iran's nuclear facilities

A general view shows the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in Natanz, about 322km south of Tehran March 9, 2006. REUTERS

Israel has not ruled out an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities in the coming months despite President Donald Trump telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the US was for now unwilling to support such a move, according to an Israeli official and two other people familiar with the matter.

Israeli officials have vowed to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, and Netanyahu has insisted that any negotiation with Iran must lead to the complete dismantling of its nuclear programme.

US and Iranian negotiators are set for a second round of preliminary nuclear talks in Rome on Saturday.

Over the past months, Israel has proposed to the Trump administration a series of options to attack Iran’s facilities, including some with late spring and summer timelines, the sources said. The plans include a mix of airstrikes and commando operations that vary in severity and could set back Tehran's ability to weaponise its nuclear programme by just months or a year or more, the sources said.

The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Trump told Netanyahu in a White House meeting earlier this month that Washington wanted to prioritise diplomatic talks with Tehran and that he was unwilling to support a strike on the country’s nuclear facilities in the short term.

But Israeli officials now believe that their military could instead launch a limited strike on Iran that would require less US support. Such an attack would be significantly smaller than those Israel initially proposed.

It is unclear if or when Israel would move forward with such a strike, especially with talks on a nuclear deal getting started. Such a move would likely alienate Trump and could risk broader US support for Israel.

Parts of the plans were previously presented last year to the Biden administration, two former senior Biden administration officials told Reuters. Almost all required significant US support via direct military intervention or intelligence sharing. Israel has also requested that Washington help Israel defend itself should Iran retaliate.

In response to a request for comment, the US National Security Council referred Reuters to comments Trump made on Thursday, when he told reporters he has not waved Israel off an attack but that he was not "in a rush" to support military action against Tehran.

“I think that Iran has a chance to have a great country and to live happily without death,” Trump said. “That's my first option. If there's a second option, I think it would be very bad for Iran, and I think Iran is wanting to talk.”

The Israeli prime minister's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A senior Israeli official told Reuters that no decision has been made yet on an Iranian strike.

A senior Iranian security official said Tehran was aware of Israeli planning and that an attack would provoke "a harsh and unwavering response from Iran."

"We have intelligence from reliable sources that Israel is planning a major attack on Iran's nuclear sites. This stems from dissatisfaction with ongoing diplomatic efforts regarding Iran’s nuclear programme, and also from Netanyahu’s need for conflict as a means of political survival," the official told Reuters.

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION PUSHBACK

Netanyahu received pushback from the Biden administration when he presented an earlier version of the plan. The former senior Biden officials said Netanyahu wanted the US to take the lead on airstrikes, but the Biden White House told Israel it did not believe a strike was prudent unless Tehran moved to accelerate its enrichment of nuclear material or expel inspectors from the country.

The Biden officials also questioned the extent to which Israel’s military could effectively carry out such an attack.

Former officials and experts have long said that Israel would need significant US military support – and weapons – to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities and stockpiles, some of which are in underground facilities.

While the more limited military strike Israel is considering would require less direct assistance – particularly in the form of US bombers dropping bunker-busting munitions that can reach deeply buried facilities – Israel would still need a promise from Washington that it would help Israel defend itself if attacked by Tehran in the aftermath, the sources said.

Any attack would carry risks. Military and nuclear experts say that even with massive firepower, a strike would probably only temporarily set back a programme the West says aims to eventually produce a nuclear bomb, although Iran denies it.

Israeli officials have told Washington in recent weeks that they do not believe US talks with Iran should move forward to the deal-making stage without a guarantee that Tehran will not have the ability to create a nuclear weapon.

"This can be done by agreement, but only if this agreement is Libyan-style: They go in, blow up the installations, dismantle all of the equipment, under American supervision," Netanyahu said following his talks with Trump. "The second possibility is ... that they (Iran) drag out the talks and then there is the military option."

From Israel's perspective, this may be a good moment for a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iran allies Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon have been hammered by Israel since the Gaza war began, while the Houthi movement in Yemen has been targeted by US airstrikes. Israel also severely damaged Iran's air defence systems in an exchange of fire in October 2024.

A top Israeli official, speaking with reporters earlier this month, recognised there was some urgency if the goal was to launch a strike before Iran rebuilds its air defences. But the senior official refused to state any timeline for possible Israeli action and said discussing this would be "pointless".