Follow us on social

google cta
51930709369_c20506d40b_o

Senior Israeli military official: Iran deal exit was a mistake

Behind closed doors, the head of the Defense Ministry's political-military bureau said what many in Israel’s security establishment believe.

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

A current senior Israeli military official reportedly said last week during a meeting with U.S. State and Defense Department officials that it was a mistake for President Trump to withdraw from the Iran nuclear agreement. 

According to Axios, retired Brig. Gen. Dror Shalom — who is head of the political-military bureau in the Israeli Ministry of Defense and previously led the country’s military intelligence research and analysis division — “stressed” in the private meeting that “the withdrawal from the Iran deal was a mistake that brought Iran closer to a nuclear weapon and created a worse situation.” 

Shalom’s comments contradict the official Israeli government position but they also line up with a slew of senior Israeli security establishment figures who have said recently that either pulling out of the JCPOA was a mistake or the United States should negotiate re-entry. 

Added to that list this week was former Military Intelligence Director Maj. Gen. (Res.) Tamir Hayman, who told right-wing newspaper Israel Hayom that the United States rejoining the deal would serve Israeli interests. 

“[T]he situation that would have happened once the nuclear deal elapsed [in 2030] wouldn't have been as bad as the current situation, as Iran has stockpiled so much enriched material and its abilities have advanced beyond what the deal had allowed it to pursue,” he said, adding that, "Therefore, my conclusion is that in the reality of here and now, reaching a deal is the right thing,"

Hayman also said that a renewed JCPOA “would diminish the offset the amount of enriched uranium Iran has; it would set it back and it would buy [us] a very long time because enrichment takes a long time."

Negotiations to return to the deal between the United States, Europe, China, Russia, and Iran have entered the final stages, with the U.S. designation of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist group — which Trump did to make it politically more difficult for any future administration to return to the JCPOA — reportedly being one of the last sticking points. 

Just this week, Sen. Rand Paul — who has recently started voicing support for reentry to the deal — told a senior Biden administration official that it should seriously consider delisting the IRGC. 

“I think we have to be open to it,” Paul said


Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken meets with Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid in Riga, Latvia, on March 7, 2022. [State Department photo by Ron Przysucha]
google cta
Reporting | Middle East
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?
Top image credit: Sens. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) sit look on during a congressional hearing in January, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA)

Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?

Washington Politics

On Wednesday, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told CNN that he would support new funding for the U.S. war with Iran — but only if Israel and Arab Gulf states help pay for it.

“We’re using our taxpayer money to protect those countries,” Gallego said. “We’re using our men to protect these countries. They need to throw in and have skin in the game too.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.