As Israel continues its military confrontation with Iran, two national security experts offered a sobering assessment of where things stand and what the conflict’s outcome will mean for the region.
Retired Maj. Gen. Danny Rothschild, former deputy director of military intelligence and chairman of the board of trustees at Afeka Academic College of Engineering in Tel Aviv, described an Israeli military campaign operating on three simultaneous tracks: degrading Iran’s missile-launch capabilities, systematically eliminating decision-makers within the Iranian establishment and dismantling Iran’s broader military infrastructure, all in close coordination with U.S. forces.
“From the first morning of the operation, we targeted the decision-makers,” Rothschild said. “And since then, on almost a daily basis, we have been doing the same to their replacements. No replacement has been able to remain in his position for more than a week or two. That has had a significant impact on the entire operation.”
Rothschild described the level of U.S.-Israeli military cooperation as unprecedented. “They are sitting in the same command post. Missions are decided and executed jointly. I have never seen anything like it, never dreamt of it.” He noted that Israel’s three-layered missile-defense system, the Arrow, David’s Sling and Iron Dome, has been achieving interception rates of between 90% and 98%, which he called “a lifesaver” for Israeli civilians absorbing daily attacks.
On the nuclear dimension of the conflict, retired Col. Ori Nissim Levy, Ph.D., chairman of the World Nuclear Forum and a lecturer at Afeka College who served 250 days of reserve duty during the Gaza war, warned that Iran remains dangerously close to nuclear weapons capability and that the most urgent concern is not what has been destroyed but what has not yet been found.
“About 85% of the resources required to build a nuclear weapon go into acquiring the fissile material,” Levy explained. “Iran has approximately 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to at least 60%. That is the most precious thing they have and we do not know exactly where it is.” He noted that uranium at that enrichment level is dense enough that 400 kilograms occupies roughly the size of a suitcase, making it relatively easy to disperse and conceal across a country of 1.6 million square kilometers.
Levy assessed that recent strikes have caused 70% to 90% damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure over the long term but cautioned that the short-term threat from the existing stockpile remains acute. “If Iran has the right centrifuges, they could move from 60% enrichment to weapons-grade material in a matter of weeks,” he said. “The long-term picture may be better after the damage that has been done. The short term is very, very problematic.”
On pathways forward, Levy outlined four possibilities: continued military strikes, a targeted operation to locate and seize the enriched uranium stockpile, a negotiated deal or regime change. He was skeptical of the deal option, pointing to the 2015 nuclear agreement’s failure to address Iran’s support for regional terror proxies, and argued that any new agreement would be difficult to verify and enforce. His assessment of the stockpile was blunt. “My prediction is that the 400 kilograms will not be found,” he said. “It is not going to be black or white. Iran has planned for the long term.”
Rothschild offered a parallel assessment of the Hezbollah front, noting that while the group has been significantly degraded compared to previous conflicts, it continues to threaten northern Israel. He said Hezbollah’s decision to join the fighting in early March was its own initiative, one that has generated increasing pushback within Lebanon itself. “More and more Shi’ite people are standing up against Hezbollah,” he said. “They are saying Hezbollah is destroying Lebanon.” He acknowledged, however, that the Lebanese government lacks the power to confront Hezbollah militarily and that a political resolution remains distant.
Both experts said the outcome of this conflict could reshape the Middle East. “When this war ends,” Rothschild said, “and hopefully it will end in a situation where Iran no longer has the power to threaten its neighbors or Israel, the whole Middle East will take a different shape.”
Levy echoed that view while raising a broader concern: the conflict has prompted more than 25 countries to accelerate their pursuit of nuclear-energy programs, some for legitimate energy reasons and others with an eye toward eventual weapons capability. “Some states want energy,” he said. “Some want to understand it as an insurance card.”
