Israel sees no immediate Iran threat, but prepares for possible solo strike

Israeli security officials have detected no immediate threat or signs that Iran is preparing to launch an attack, despite a new warning from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) about an uninspected nuclear facility in Isfahan. Nevertheless, the IDF remains on alert for the possibility of renewed fighting, with military intelligence updating potential targets and the Air Force reviewing lessons from previous operations as Israel considers whether it may ultimately need to act against Iran without American military support.

The assessment comes amid a continued buildup of American military capabilities across the Middle East, particularly air defenses and aerial refueling assets. Washington, however, has not redeployed the bomber force that operated against Iran in March, leaving questions over whether President Donald Trump is prepared to authorize another major offensive. In Israel, the IDF is maintaining both offensive and defensive readiness while navigating the country's complex political situation.

Air Force commanders are working to improve operational capabilities following Operation Roaring Lion, with particular emphasis on preserving the air superiority achieved during earlier rounds of fighting. Military planners recognize that another campaign could require new approaches to sustaining that advantage over an extended period. American naval deployments in the region currently resemble the force posture seen in March. Approximately 17 U.S. warships are operating within the area of responsibility of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), including two aircraft carriers, 13 destroyers and a cruiser.

The USS Theodore Roosevelt and its accompanying strike group are expected to arrive later, although some reports suggest the carrier could replace the USS George Washington rather than increase the total number of American carriers in the region. According to data compiled by Israel's Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) and researcher Stefan Cohen, approximately 200 American fighter aircraft are deployed in the region, supported by an aerial refueling fleet of roughly 200 aircraft.

The deployment provides Washington with substantial operational capabilities, but the long-range bomber force used during the March campaign has yet to return to previously identified regional bases. At least 16 American military transport aircraft have landed at Ovda Air Base in southern Israel since mid-October, according to flight-tracking data. The United States has also transferred a Patriot air defense system to Israel and reinforced other defensive systems across the region.

The movements reflect efforts to strengthen protection against possible Iranian retaliation, although the military transport flights do not establish that Washington has decided to launch another attack. Maritime cooperation between Israel and Greece is also expanding. For Israeli defense officials, the central question is not simply whether another military campaign is possible, but what it would be intended to achieve. Approximately 450 kilograms of highly enriched uranium remain in Iran, according to the Israeli report, with Western intelligence officials believed to have information about its whereabouts.

Yet much of Iran's nuclear infrastructure was not targeted during Operation Roaring Lion, leaving uncertainty over what another offensive could accomplish. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly raised the possibility of bringing down Iran's ruling regime, but defense officials recognize that regime change would be difficult to achieve through an air campaign alone. Any decision to resume fighting would therefore require clearer political objectives, alongside assurances that the military has sufficient resources to sustain operations.

The IDF is also seeking greater strategic and budgetary certainty to support long-term planning across Israel's multiple security fronts. IAEA warns over uninspected uranium enrichment facility The military preparations come against the backdrop of a confidential IAEA report expressing increasing concern about the Isfahan Fuel Enrichment Plant (IFEP), a facility Iran declared to the nuclear watchdog in June 2025 but has never allowed inspectors to examine.

The report, obtained by Reuters and submitted to IAEA member states ahead of next week's Board of Governors meeting, says inspectors still cannot establish the plant's precise location, its status under nuclear safeguards or whether it contains nuclear material. Tehran has also refused to provide access to the facility's design plans. The report does not conclude that uranium enrichment is currently taking place there. The facility is believed to be associated with an underground tunnel complex at Isfahan, where IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi previously indicated that a significant quantity of Iran's highly enriched uranium might be stored.

However, the agency has been unable to verify the material's status or inspect facilities damaged during previous Israeli and American strikes. Iranian officials have insisted that they will not allow even a single particle of enriched nuclear material to leave the country. In Israel, the immediate concern is the absence of reliable international monitoring of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile, rather than confirmed evidence that a new enrichment operation has begun.

Avner Vilan, an Iranian nuclear expert who previously held senior positions in Israel's defense establishment, warned that the IAEA findings raise troubling questions about the scope of Tehran's remaining nuclear capabilities and the ability of Israel and the United States to monitor them after the previous strikes. Iran raises missile threats, Israel considers acting alone Alongside the nuclear uncertainty, Iran is signaling that its missile capabilities could eventually extend well beyond the Middle East.

The Revolutionary Guard-affiliated Tasnim news agency reported Saturday that Iran possesses the technical ability to develop ballistic missiles with ranges exceeding 2,000 kilometers, potentially bringing targets in Europe within reach. The report focused on the Khorramshahr-4 ballistic missile, suggesting that reducing the weight of its warhead could extend its range to between 3,000 and 4,000 kilometers. According to Tasnim, that could allow Iran to target American military installations and U.S. allies in parts of Europe.

The claims were presented as possible technical developments, not independently verified operational capabilities. Tasnim also discussed the possibility of developing intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching the United States. The agency estimated that striking the American East Coast would require a missile with a range of approximately 10,000 kilometers, while reaching all parts of the country would require a range exceeding 13,000 kilometers.

There is no confirmed evidence that Iran currently possesses such missiles. The report followed remarks by Revolutionary Guard spokesman Hossein Mohebbi, who said last week that Iran had removed its previously declared restrictions on missile ranges. Asked about the 2,000-kilometer limit, Mohebbi stated that the restriction had been lifted. His comments came after a warning attributed to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei that threats from Israel or the United States would face a response without geographical limitations.

Meanwhile, Israeli intelligence reportedly provided Washington with specific information concerning alleged Iranian plans to carry out drone attacks against senior American administration officials, including Trump. The intelligence was passed to the United States amid reports that several senior administration figures had relocated to military bases because of security concerns. The alleged Iranian plans have not been independently confirmed.

Israel is continuing diplomatic and intelligence efforts to persuade Washington to renew military operations against Iran. Mossad Director Roman Gofman traveled to the United States for discussions concerning Tehran, in another indication of the close coordination between Israeli and American security agencies. According to reports, Netanyahu did not inform Yashar chairman Gadi Eisenkot of the visit during their recent security briefing.

Netanyahu is expected to convene the security cabinet Sunday evening for its first meeting since Israel entered a caretaker-government period following the October elections. The prime minister has been pushing for renewed military action against Iran, but IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir has reportedly expressed reservations about the timing of another offensive, particularly without American backing. Netanyahu also invoked the Iranian threat in his recorded statement Saturday evening calling on Eisenkot to form a national unity government.

He warned that Tehran was attempting to revive its nuclear program and argued that Israel needed a broad government capable of confronting what he described as an existential danger. Israel's preferred scenario remains a coordinated military operation alongside the United States. For now, however, Trump appears reluctant to authorize another round of large-scale strikes and is focusing on an upcoming trip to China, where he is expected to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Sources familiar with the discussions note that the American political calendar still leaves Trump time to reconsider military action before the new Congress is sworn in on January 3, 2027. But without a clear decision from Washington, Israeli officials increasingly recognize that any renewed campaign against Iran may have to be conducted independently. The prospect of a solo operation leaves Israel facing several difficult choices: how to address Iran's remaining enriched uranium, whether an air campaign can achieve lasting results and how to sustain military operations without the full weight of American support.

With no immediate Iranian attack detected and no U.S. commitment to another offensive, the challenge for Israel's political and military leadership is determining what another war would achieve and whether the country is prepared to pursue those objectives alone.