Strategic scenarios after the Israeli strike on Iran
(This article was published by the Middle East Institute.)
The Middle East has entered a dangerous and uncertain moment. Much now depends on the next moves by Israel, Iran, and the United States.
On the Israeli side, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has positioned himself as a central actor in any deal — or no deal — with Iran. He may choose to pause after this large-scale operation, absorb Iran’s initial retaliation, and allow a brief window for renewed diplomacy. The goal would be a deal that includes zero uranium enrichment and full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Alternatively, Israel could pursue sustained military operations, as it has done with Hezbollah in Lebanon, to further degrade Iran’s nuclear program and weaken its leadership and decision-making apparatus.
For Iran, the calculus is more constrained. While it must respond — and already has — its overriding interest is to avoid a full-scale conflict it cannot win. The imbalance in military power with Israel and the United States is stark. While Iran can inflict damage, Israel’s defenses and those of its partners are likely to largely neutralize most attacks. Striking US assets would trigger a forceful American response — an outcome Tehran seeks to avoid. Attacking targets in the Gulf would alienate key regional partners, undermining Iran’s long-term position.
Iran’s leadership is likely focused now on regime survival, and Israel has made it clear that the strategy of obfuscating and playing for time in fruitless negotiations has run its course. They may recognize that the only figure capable of restraining Netanyahu is Donald Trump, and that the wiser path may be to signal readiness to reengage diplomatically after a brief cooling-off period. In early April, Trump gave Iran 60 days to reach a deal. The Israeli strike comes as that deadline expired. Trump has already linked the attack to his deadline, and warned Iran to take advantage of a “second chance” or face more dire consequences. The Israeli strike gives Washington new leverage to push for a zero-enrichment deal.
Whether Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is prepared to make the kind of painful concession his predecessor made to end the Iran-Iraq war — what Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini called “drinking the poisoned chalice” — remains to be seen. However, this is, after all, the first strike of such magnitude on Iranian soil since that war.
To be sure, there is a real risk of escalation that could drag in the US and destabilize the Gulf. But, to borrow US Democratic Party strategist Rahm Emanuel’s phrase, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” This moment, perilous as it is, also offers a narrow opening to revive diplomacy toward a quick and satisfactory deal that takes the specter of an Iranian nuclear weapons program off the table. That opening should be rapidly and intensively tested.