“There is a lot of frustration in Israel”: analyst Milshtein’s alarm on the scenario after the Iran-US truce

Milshtein recalls that ”there were three main objectives: the collapse of the Iranian regime (or at least its weakening). The elimination of Iran’s nuclear power” and ”long-range ballistic missiles”. But, he analyses, ”at the moment there are no certainties” regarding these objectives. Indeed, he states, ”it is clear that the regime has survived and is rather stable”, so much so that ”there are no signs of internal revolts”. Furthermore, the analyst underlines, ”we have no guarantee that the negotiations will lead to a mechanism to resolve the problem of the nuclear or missile program”.

The fear of Iranian nuclear power

Milshtein states that in Israel ”many think that the end of the war is riskier today than 40 days ago. The Iranian regime has become more radical: Khamenei is dead, and in his place the Pasdaran now commands, who are much more extremist and seeking revenge. We fear that Iran may rush towards the atomic bomb; they still have 430 kilograms of enriched uranium, enough to create up to 11 nuclear bombs”. The hope, says the analyst, is that the United States can play a decisive role. ”We hope that the Americans will be tough enough in the negotiations to condition the removal of sanctions on serious steps on nuclear power, but we are not sure,” he declares.

The Lebanese front

The former colonel of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) then recalls ”the other great challenge” that concerns Israel, namely ”the northern front”. What ”we don’t know”, he says, is ”if an agreement with Iran will mean the end of the war in Lebanon. We could find ourselves in a bizarre situation: an agreement between the USA and Iran, but with the Lebanese front still open”. Milshtein explains that ”Hezbollah does not want to return to the conditions of the ceasefire of November 24”, but on the contrary ”it wants a ‘new equation”’. And ”if no agreement is reached on this, Israel will remain embroiled in a continuing campaign in Lebanon, and the only option may be to occupy parts of the territory or strike Lebanese state targets”.

”In summary – concludes Milshtein – we don’t know how the negotiations will end. Maybe in two weeks the Americans will decide to fight again if they understand that the gap is too great. But if an agreement is reached, two risks remain: an Iran that runs towards nuclear power without pressure and a Lebanese front that remains open”.