Washington Worries the Israelis Will Bomb Iran’s Nuclear Sites. But Can They?

For 22 years, Israeli forces have been preparing for this situation. However, it seems improbable that they will target Iran's nuclear sites in their next response, and achieving success in such an operation without the support of the United States appears unlikely.

Written by David E. Sanger, Eric Schmitt, and Ronen Bergman.

David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt contributed their reporting from Washington, while Ronen Bergman provided insights from Tel Aviv. Together, they have covered the Iranian nuclear program for over 20 years.

October 7, 2024, 6:34 PM Eastern Time

Two years back, numerous Israeli fighter jets soared over the Mediterranean, practicing an attack on Iran's nuclear sites. The Israeli military made no secret of this operation, promoting it as a training session focused on long-distance flight, aerial refueling, and hitting targets far away.

The purpose of this exercise went beyond just scaring the Iranians. It was also meant to convey an important message to the Biden administration: the Israeli air force was preparing to carry out the mission independently, despite the fact that the likelihood of success would significantly increase if the United States participated with its powerful arsenal of 30,000-pound “bunker busters.”

In conversations, both past and present high-ranking Israeli officials expressed uncertainty about whether Israel can effectively strike Iran's nuclear installations. However, in recent days, officials at the Pentagon have been speculating in hushed tones about whether Israel is getting ready to take unilateral action, believing they might not get another chance like the current situation.

President Biden has cautioned against targeting nuclear or energy facilities, emphasizing that any retaliation should be “proportional” to the Iranian assault on Israel that occurred last week. This implies that a counteraction is deemed acceptable. Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III has expressed to Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant that the U.S. wants Israel to steer clear of retaliatory actions that could trigger further escalation from Iran. Mr. Gallant is set to meet with Mr. Austin in Washington on Wednesday.

Officials suggest that Israel's initial response to Iran's missile attacks on Tuesday will probably target military installations, and possibly some intelligence or command centers. For now, it appears that Israel is not planning to strike at Iran's crucial nuclear facilities. After much discussion, it seems these more significant targets have been set aside for a later time, should Iran decide to retaliate further.

There is a growing sentiment in Israel, supported by some voices in the United States, to take advantage of the current situation and delay Iran's nuclear capabilities significantly, potentially for years. American intelligence officials and external analysts are warning that Iran is getting close to being able to produce a nuclear bomb. While many discussions have highlighted how quickly Iran could increase uranium enrichment to weapons grade—possibly within weeks—the more critical point is that it would require Iranian engineers several months, or maybe even over a year, to turn that enriched material into a weapon that can be used.

Naftali Bennett, a former prime minister and a staunch nationalist known for being further right than Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, recently stated on social media that Israel is facing its best chance in half a century to transform the Middle East. He emphasized the urgency of taking immediate action to dismantle Iran's nuclear program and critical energy infrastructure, aiming to significantly weaken the regime he labels as a terrorist entity.

He stated, “We have the reasons to take action and the means to do so. With Hezbollah and Hamas unable to operate, Iran is now vulnerable.”

U.S. leaders, led by President Biden, have launched an effort to rule out these types of attacks, arguing that they probably wouldn't work and could lead to a large-scale conflict in the area.

The topic of how to deal with Iran has turned into a talking point in the election. Former President Donald J. Trump suggested that Israel should take the initiative to strike Iran's nuclear capabilities first and deal with any consequences afterward. However, this was a stance he hesitated to adopt during his presidency. Recently, Representative Michael R. Turner, who leads the House Intelligence Committee, took aim at President Biden during an appearance on CBS's "Face the Nation." He called it "utterly irresponsible" for the president to claim that military action is off the table when he had previously acknowledged that it was a possible option.

The unexpected discussion about a potential strike has sparked fresh inquiries. If Israel were to conduct an attack, how significantly would it impact Iran's nuclear development? Alternatively, could such an action just push Iran's nuclear operations further underground, resulting in the country denying access to the few nuclear inspectors who still have limited but ongoing oversight of its main sites? Moreover, what if an Israeli strike pushes Iran's leadership to finally pursue the development of a nuclear weapon—an option they have, for almost 25 years, deliberately avoided?

Natanz: Revisiting An Old Target, Facing A New One

For the past 22 years, both Israel and Washington have focused their attention on the Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, which is located deep in the desert, approximately three stories underground.

Israel has created strategies aimed at dismantling or severely damaging the massive centrifuge facility, where thousands of tall, silver machines operate at extremely high speeds to process uranium into material that could be suitable for nuclear weapons. Although the Iranian government officially states that it is not pursuing nuclear weapons, there has been considerable discussion among various Iranian officials and commentators in recent months about whether the 2003 fatwa issued by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which prohibits the possession of nuclear arms, should be reconsidered.

At the same time, Iran has increased its output of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity, which is just below the level needed for nuclear weapons. Experts estimate that the country currently possesses enough material for three to four atomic bombs, and it could reach the bomb-grade level of 90 percent in just a matter of days.

Although Natanz could be an accessible target, striking it would signify a declaration of war. Therefore, over the last 15 years, the United States has advocated for diplomatic measures, covert operations, and sanctions instead of military action to disrupt the nuclear program. Additionally, it has taken steps to prevent Israel from obtaining the necessary weapons to target another underground centrifuge site known as Fordow, which is situated deep within a mountain.

President George W. Bush rejected Israel's requests for the largest bunker-busting bombs from the United States, as well as the B-2 bombers required to transport them. These weapons would play a crucial role in any attempt to destroy Fordow and other heavily fortified underground sites.

Mr. Bush’s choice sparked a debate within the White House. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the idea of a military action, but Mr. Bush remained firm, insisting that the U.S. could not afford to engage in another conflict in the Middle East. Ehud Barak, who was Israel's top military leader and later served as prime minister, mentioned in a 2019 interview with The Times that Mr. Bush’s caution “didn’t really impact us.” By the close of 2008, he noted that Israel lacked a practical strategy for launching an attack on Iran.

Before long, the situation escalated significantly. The debate surrounding the bunker busters led to the creation of a major secret initiative named “Olympic Games.” This highly classified collaboration between Israel and the United States aimed to dismantle the centrifuges with the help of a cyber weapon. Ultimately, over 1,000 centrifuges were taken out by what came to be called the Stuxnet virus, delaying the program's progress by at least a year.

However, the Olympic Games did not provide a simple solution: The Iranians revitalized their program, bringing in thousands of additional centrifuges. They also shifted a significant portion of their operations to deeper underground facilities. Moreover, the revelation of the harmful computer virus that got out of the facility led other nations to concentrate on enhancing their own cyber attack capabilities, targeting essential infrastructures like power grids and water systems.

The Israelis targeted scientists for assassination, launched strikes on surface-level enrichment sites, used drones to hit centrifuge production centers, and dedicated significant resources to prepare for a potential assault on these facilities.

Israel's attempts faced difficulties after the Obama administration secured a nuclear agreement with Iran, which resulted in Iran exporting a large portion of its nuclear fuel. Later, when Mr. Trump withdrew from the agreement, both he and Mr. Netanyahu believed that Iran would abandon its programs due to the pressure from Washington. As a result, the Israeli Defense Forces shifted their attention towards Hezbollah and the concealed tunnels used to store missiles supplied by Iran.

When Mr. Bennett took office as prime minister in 2021, Israeli officials report that he was taken aback by how unprepared Israel was to launch an offensive against the Iranian program. He called for new military drills to mimic the long flights needed to reach Iran and allocated additional resources to enhance preparations. Even now, Israel's ability to engage in such actions remains constrained. The nation depends on an outdated fleet of Boeing 707 refueling aircraft, and it will be years before the more advanced models, which can supply fuel for much longer distances, arrive from the United States.

Israel's specialized bunker buster bombs have proven successful in targeting the tunnels used by Hezbollah to conceal missiles. These weapons also played a role in the Israeli forces successfully eliminating Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, last month. Israeli officials are confident they can dismantle the air defenses surrounding several nuclear sites; they demonstrated this capability by striking one site during a missile confrontation with Iran in April. However, penetrating heavily fortified nuclear facilities that are located deep in the mountains remains a significant challenge for Israel.

"The nuclear target presents significant challenges," stated General Frank McKenzie, who oversaw the Iran war strategies while leading United States Central Command. "There are numerous other options available that could be considered," he noted, mentioning that many of these alternatives, particularly energy infrastructure, would be simpler to carry out.

Regardless of whether Israel attacks Iran's nuclear sites, there are fresh reasons to worry about the future of Iran's nuclear program.

The first point, which Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken has mentioned several times lately, is his claim that, according to undisclosed intelligence, Russia is providing Iran with technological support related to nuclear matters. Officials refer to this support as "technical assistance" and emphasize that there is no proof that Russia is supplying Iran with the necessary equipment to create a nuclear weapon.

Before the conflict in Ukraine began, Russia worked alongside the United States and Europe to limit Iran's nuclear development, even participating in the 2015 talks alongside Western countries. However, if the recent American reports are accurate, Russia's growing reliance on Iranian drones and other military supplies may accelerate Iran's efforts to develop a nuclear weapon.

The second worry is that recent setbacks for Hezbollah, such as the removal of its leaders, could lead Iran to feel exposed. It can no longer rely on the group to carry out attacks against Israel. As a result, pursuing a nuclear weapon might be seen as its primary means of discouraging Israel.

The third worry is that targeting Iran's program will become increasingly difficult. A few years back, with American and Israeli satellites monitoring closely, Iran started to construct an extensive network of tunnels just south of Natanz. The U.S. suspects this is for a new enrichment facility, which would be Iran's largest. However, it's not operational yet. Historically, Israel has opted to launch preemptive strikes on unfinished nuclear reactors, as seen in Iraq in 1981 and in Syria in 2007.

David E. Sanger reports on the Biden administration and issues related to national security. With over forty years of experience as a journalist for The Times, he has authored multiple books exploring the threats to American security. Learn more about David E. Sanger.

Eric Schmitt works as a national security reporter for The Times, specializing in U.S. military operations and international counterterrorism topics. He has been covering these subjects for over 30 years. Learn more about Eric Schmitt.

Ronen Bergman works as a staff writer for The New York Times Magazine and is located in Tel Aviv. His most recent book is titled “Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations,” and it was released by Random House. Find out more about Ronen Bergman.