The war over Hormuz must not replace the fight against a nuclear Iran - opinion

Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Amos Yadlin argues that the ongoing confrontation over the Strait of Hormuz risks eclipsing the core strategic threat of a nuclear Iran. He analyzes the stalemate between Washington and Tehran, the ambiguous June MOU, and Israel's limited leverage, warning against treating maritime success as a substitute for nuclear containment.

Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Amos Yadlin argues that the ongoing US-Iran confrontation over the Strait of Hormuz risks eclipsing the core strategic threat of a nuclear Iran. He analyzes the stalemate between Washington and Tehran, noting that neither side is willing to accept a low-intensity conflict or pay the price of all-out war. The June memorandum of understanding is described as a 'memorandum of misunderstanding' with ambiguous phrasing that allows each side to read a different agreement. Yadlin warns that once freedom of navigation is restored, pressure will mount on President Trump to declare mission accomplished, substituting maritime success for nuclear containment. He notes Israel's limited leverage in Washington, with Netanyahu's visit lacking a joint press statement or photo op. Yadlin concludes that direct Israeli involvement would be justified only if Iran attacks Israel directly or if the US requests specific assistance.