woensdag 4 maart 2026

Israel flagged Hezbollah threat before launching air attacks, leaked memo shows

 


Israel flagged Hezbollah threat before launching air attacks, leaked memo shows

US embassy cable said Israeli officials did not trust Lebanon or Syria to contain the group’s fighters

An internal US assessment indicates that Israeli officials had doubts that the Lebanese state could disarm Hezbollah even before Israel launched an aerial campaign against the group on Monday.

The leaked embassy cable shows that on the eve of the joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran, Israeli officials had told Washington that Hezbollah was reconstituting its military capabilities faster than the Lebanese armed forces could degrade them. It said neither Beirut nor Damascus could be trusted to contain the threat on Israel’s northern borders.

The 27 February cable, seen by the Guardian, was sent to Washington a day before Israel and the US launched their aerial campaign against Iran, killing the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and prompting Tehran to launch retaliatory strikes across the region.

Three days after the US cable was sent, Israel launched the first of a wave of airstrikes against Hezbollah-dominated areas in southern Beirut.

The cable indicated that Israel doubted Syria’s new leaders could control their own security forces and was “gravely” alarmed by Turkish military entrenchment in Syria, which it warned could create a strategic threat to Israel’s north. It also claimed that Turkish officials had “repeatedly incited against Israel in Syria” even while Israeli and Turkish national security officials maintained “de-confliction” agreements. The cable said this suggested Ankara was pursuing a dual track – managing relations with Tel Aviv privately while positioning itself militarily in Syria at Israel’s expense.

Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, has angered Middle East nations with his views on Israel seizing territory. Photograph: Ohad Zwigenberg/AP

The cable was intended as a background briefing for the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, before a trip to Israel that was later cancelled.

It was written under the auspices of the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee. A self-avowed Christian Zionist, Huckabee had days earlier told the US journalist Tucker Carlson it would be “fine” if Israel seized territory stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, encompassing Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and parts of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. 

The remarks triggered a diplomatic scandal and condemnation from 14 governments, prompting the embassy to say “US policy has not changed”.

Huckabee also told Carlson that if Israel “ended up getting attacked by all these places and they win that war and they take that land, OK, that’s a whole other discussion”.

The embassy cable said Israeli officials had lost confidence in the Lebanese state ever moving against Hezbollah. Israel, according to the internal report, “harbours major doubts Hezbollah will agree to give up its weapons” and questions the Lebanese government’s “commitment to confront Hezbollah to take control of all Lebanese territory”.

Iranian funding was still reaching the group “through Turkey and elsewhere”, the cable said, despite the November 2024 ceasefire. The Israel Defense Forces, the cable added, had already been forced “to pick up military attacks on Hezbollah as a result”.

The Lebanese army announced in January that it had taken over security in southern Lebanon – a move Israel greeted with scepticism. The office of the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said efforts toward fully disarming Hezbollah were “an encouraging beginning, but they are far from sufficient, as evidenced by Hezbollah’s efforts to rearm and rebuild its terror infrastructure with Iranian support”.

The ceasefire, brokered after months of cross-border exchanges, was already under strain before the Iran strikes began, with Israeli forces maintaining five military outposts north of a UN-demarcated blue line inside Lebanese territory.

On Syria, Israeli officials told embassy staff they doubted its president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, had the “ability and willingness to control his security forces”. They expressed what the internal report called “grave” concern over Turkish military entrenchment, warning it could “create a strategic threat to Israel”.

Israel has maintained a military presence in the UN buffer zone separating Israel and Syria since the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024, a move widely condemned internationally but which Israel insists is a defensive necessity.

The cable was sent the day before US and Israeli strikes on Iran began. Within 72 hours, Hezbollah had fired rockets into northern Israel for the first time since the 2024 ceasefire, Israel had bombed Beirut and Lebanon’s prime minister, Nawaf Salam, had convened an emergency cabinet meeting demanding that Hezbollah disarm.

In January, Hezbollah’s leader, Naim Qassem, showed little sign he would heed that call, saying that any attack on Tehran was an attack on Hezbollah.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/04/israel-flagged-hezbollah-threat-before-launching-air-attacks-leaked-memo-shows

Attacking Iran’s nuclear programme could drive it towards a bomb, experts warn

 




Attacking Iran’s nuclear programme could drive it towards a bomb, experts warn

Fears US-Israeli onslaught could lead regime to push for bomb or embolden other groups to steal uranium stockpile

The US-Israeli onslaught against Iran is intended to resolve a 24-year standoff over Tehran’s nuclear programme, but it runs the risk of backfiring and driving the regime towards making a secret bomb, proliferation experts have warned.

The regime in Tehran has long insisted that the programme is for civilian purposes and it has no intention of making a nuclear weapon. However, since two undeclared sites, for uranium enrichment and heavy water plutonium production, were discovered in 2002, the programme has been treated with intense suspicion.

nuclear deal in 2015 imposed severe limits and thorough inspections on Iran but when Donald Trump walked out of the agreement in 2018, triggering its collapse, Iran ramped up its work on enrichment and other aspects of the programme.

Most worryingly for the international community, Iran had by last summer produced a stockpile of just over 440kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU), of 60% purity. In terms of technical difficulty, once at 60%, it is a relatively easy step to reach 90% – weapons-grade uranium that can be used to make a compact warhead.

With further enrichment and conversion of the uranium from gas to metal form, Iran’s 440kg stockpile would be enough to make more than 10 warheads.

The anxiety over this stockpile, accumulated since the torpedoing of the 2015 nuclear deal, was the motive for last June’s US-Israeli strikes on Iran. The US role, Operation Midnight Hammer, was focused on dropping bunker-busting bombs on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Trump claimed the bombardment had “obliterated” the nuclear programme, but it soon became apparent this was not true. The bombs had wreaked extensive damage, but deep underground sites, burrowed beneath mountains in two sites in particular, Isfahan and Natanz, could not be destroyed.

In response to the attacks, Iran excluded UN inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from those and other sensitive sites, with the result that the watchdog lost track of what became of the 440kg HEU stockpile, and of what was being done in the deep tunnels in Isfahan and Natanz.

In its latest report, the IAEA conceded it could not verify whether Iran had suspended all enrichment-related activities, or the size of its uranium stockpile at the affected nuclear facilities.

Despite that uncertainty, the IAEA director general, Rafael Grossi, said on Monday that “we don’t see a structured programme to manufacture nuclear weapons”.

However, nuclear proliferation experts worry that might change in the aftermath of an attack aimed at destroying the regime that has ruled Iran for 47 years, and the killing of its supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who had issued a religious edict, a fatwa, against the building of a bomb.

“That is what makes this such a tremendous roll of the dice,” said Jeffrey Lewis, a distinguished scholar of global security at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey. “Because if the strike does not succeed in removing a regime, there remain thousands of people in Iran who are capable of reconstituting a programme like this.”

Lewis added: “The technology itself is decades old, and a vengeful Iran that survives this strike is likely to reach the same conclusion that North Korea reached, that it’s a dangerous world out there with the United States, and it’s better to go nuclear.”

Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, agreed that in the aftermath of the attack there would be greater motivation within the remnants of the regime “pushing Iran towards weaponisation no matter how this conflict ends, because of the nature in which it started”.

Davenport pointed out that if the regime collapsed or if a civil war broke out, the fate of Iran’s HEU stockpile would become a major global problem.

“If we end up in a scenario where we have regime implosion, where Iran becomes so internally destabilised that there is a real risk that material is diverted, that it is stolen … there’s going to be a lot of pressure on the United States to put boots on the ground,” Davenport said.

“There’s a real nuclear terrorism risk to Trump’s regime change objective that I have not heard the administration acknowledging.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/04/us-israel-strikes-iran-nuclear-program-could-backfire