Supplying Israel with 30,000-pound bombs could deter Iran’s nuclear threat - opinion

A Wall Street Journal headline after Israel’s retaliatory strike on Iranian military facilities said, “Israel’s Strikes on Iran, While Measured, Push Region Deeper into a Dangerous Era… Direct conflict between the foes has reset rules of engagement.”

After two massive Iranian ballistic missile attacks and a restrained Israeli response, America is seeking to de-escalate the conflict and prevent a regional war. 

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin warned Iran not to “make the mistake of responding to Israel’s strikes.”

So, how could providing Israel with massive ordnance bombs (GBU-43/B or GBU-57) and the planes to deliver them lessen the risk of another Iranian ballistic missile attack and “reset the rules of engagement” for the better?”

It seems counter-intuitive, but if the United States provides Israel with the ability to penetrate Iran’s deeply buried nuclear facilities, Iran may be much more hesitant to respond to the Israeli attack on Iranian soil or move towards weaponization and complete a functioning atomic bomb.

Why do American foreign policy strategists and the Biden administration dismiss this scenario?

This is due to their assessment of the war between Israel and Iran through Western lenses, and their underestimation of the impact of revolutionary Shi’ite jihadist ideology on their strategies, responses, and actions. 

Our experts would do well to listen to the former head of the US National Security Agency, Gen. H.R. McMaster, who spoke about the need to have strategic empathy and the ability to put themselves in the shoes of their adversary, “looking at issues from the perspective of others,” as a way to prevent wars.

When former supreme leader Khomeini said, “We shall export our revolution to the whole world. Until the cry ‘There is no god but Allah’ resounds over the whole world,” he meant it. 

That remains the passion, mission, and creed of the Iranian Republic of Iran to this day.

The Israelis are a Western democratic nation swimming in a sea of authoritarian regimes, including one that has made it abundantly clear that its expansionist agenda includes the elimination of the Jewish state and its seven million Jewish inhabitants. 

The State Department is unwilling to re-evaluate its misconstrued analysis of the nature of the Islamic Republic, as they are married to a narrative that says Iran will not choose ideology as its lodestar to guide its hegemonic ambitions and genocidal intentions.

Scaring the supreme leader and the IRGC 

However, regime change does scare the supreme leader and the IRGC, and they will react to dangers threatening the regime’s survival. 

Giving Israel the means to imperil Iran’s nuclear program is one of the best ways, short of allowing an attack on their nuclear facilities, to slow their nuclear program, prevent a retaliatory ballistic missile attack on Israel, and deescalate the conflict.

What would Israel need to provide a credible threat to the Iranian nuclear program and deter Iran? 

Transferring mothballed American B-52 bombers that can carry massive, deeply penetrating ordnance would be a good start. 

Alternatively, Israel possesses C-130 Hercules transport planes and F-15i Ra’am (Thunder) aircraft, which could theoretically undergo retrofitting to carry 30,000-pound bombs.

Both the US and Israeli intelligence services have deeply penetrated Iran’s political and military structures. 

This was best evidenced by Israel’s recent assassination of the Hamas leader Haniyeh in a Tehran safe house and the series of Iranian scientists targeted by Mossad over the last two decades. 

The hope is that this level of intelligence would give enough warning if Iran races to a nuclear bomb, but the failure of intelligence to warn Israel or the US of the October 7, 2023, attack has shaken everyone’s confidence.

America must clearly communicate to Iran that any advancement in the weaponization of a nuclear device, including the development of neutron initiators, advanced computer modeling, increasing the quantity of uranium metal for an atomic weapon, or increasing stockpiles of enriched uranium beyond 20% enrichment, could serve as a trigger for a preemptive attack, provided Israel possesses the necessary weapons. 

The answer for stability in the Middle East 

This could create a more sustainable deterrence, leading to more stability in the Middle East.

Back in 2020, a bipartisan piece of legislation (H.R. 8733, United States-Israel Common Defense Authorization Act) asked the president to consider authorizing the transfer of massive bombs to Israel. 

Democratic Representative Josh Gottheimer said it would “help ensure Israel’s QME in the region and secure both of our countries from the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.” 

This was co-sponsored by Republican Congressman Brian Mast, but the legislation died in the House without a vote. 

A new Congress could resurrect this legislation and give the next president a new option to deter the Supreme Leader and the IRGC.

The Iranian “leopard won’t change its spots,” but its choices can be managed. In the past, Iran viewed American conciliatory actions, such as the failure to enforce sanctions, as a sign of weakness, appeasement, and an invitation for aggression. 

Strength, as in providing Israel with the means to destroy their nuclear program, is the best path to delay an Iranian atomic bomb, restore deterrence, and deescalate the conflict.

The writer is the director of the Middle East Political Information Network and Mandel Strategies and the senior security editor for The Jerusalem Report. He regularly briefs members of the US Congress and their foreign policy aides on the Middle East.