Netanyahu signals Tehran’s nuclear program could be next target as Iran plans future attack

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signaled on Thursday that Iran’s nuclear program could be Jerusalem’s next line of attack as Tehran promises to return fire following last week’s air strikes. 

“The supreme objective that I have set for the IDF and the security services is to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said while speaking at a course graduation ceremony for soldiers in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). “Halting the nuclear program has been – and remains – our chief concern. 

“I have not taken, we have not taken, and we will not take, our eyes off this objective,” he added. 

IRAN AND RUSSIA CLOSE IN ON DEAL AS TEHRAN THREATENS REVENGE AGAINST ISRAEL

The prime minister’s comments were in response to an apparent threat issued by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who on Sunday said in a post on X, “Zionists are making a miscalculation with respect to Iran. They don’t know Iran.” 

“They still haven’t been able to correctly understand the power, initiative, and determination of the Iranian people. We need to make them understand these things,” Khamenei added. 

Netanyahu’s suggestion that Israel could next target Iranian nuclear facilities is in line with other comments made by the IDF that vowed to escalate its attack “capabilities” and target hit list should Iran follow through with another attack on the Jewish state. 

The U.S. – Israel’s chief ally in its fight against Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran – has repeatedly warned Jerusalem against hitting Iran’s energy infrastructure, in particular, its nuclear and oil facilities, out of concern it could prompt an outright regional war. 

Reports this week suggested that Iran could be waiting until after the U.S. presidential election next week, though other reports have said Tehran’s retaliatory strike could come at any time. 

The repeated tit-for-tat exchanges between IDF and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) forces could soon be joined by Iranian-backed groups other than Hamas and Hezbollah, particularly after Israel struck Iran-backed militant groups in Iraq and Syria last week. 

ISRAEL CEASE-FIRE PLAN FOR LEBANON SEEKS TO BYPASS UN, AS US MEDIATORS TRAVEL TO JERUSALEM FOR TALKS

A report by Axios on Thursday said Israeli intelligence believes the imminent attack on the Jewish state may not come directly from Iran next time, but from an Iranian-backed militia in Iraq. 

“The last thing the Islamic Republic wants is a normalization of attacks against its own territory, even though all it seems to be doing is normalizing direct attacks from its own territory against Israel, as well as against a whole host of proxy attacks,” expert on Iran-Israel security matters and senior fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies Behnam Ben Taleblu told Fox News Digital. 

Iran, which shares a border with Iraq, is believed to have transferred short-range ballistic missiles into the hands of its proxy forces in the neighboring country in 2018.

This missile capability, which typically has a firing range of roughly 600 miles, would allow Iranian-backed forces in western Iraq and in neighboring Syria to hit certain areas in northern Israel. 

Ben Taleblu explained that while Syria shares a border with Israel and would therefore be more geographically optimal for Iranian proxy forces to hit the Jewish state, Syria is a “free fire zone” given the West’s rocky relationship with the Bashar al-Assad regime and the decadelong fight against ISIS in Syria.

“Iran has already seen much of its infrastructure – when it comes to domestic missile production or radars or IRGC command and control in Syria – go up in flames,” Ben Taleblu said. 

The expert further explained that potentially drawing the fight with Israel to Iraq not only pushes it off its own territory, but it could also demand an international response given the U.S.’s history with Baghdad. 

“There perhaps may be more of a political taboo for the Israelis to strike in Iraq, given more of the American presence there,” the expert said. “[There is a] desire to shield themselves as much as possible, while opening as many fronts as much as possible. 

“Staying in Iraq offers them a bit more cover,” Ben Taleblu added. 

[#item_full_content]