Over the past two decades, Iran has been the primary existential threat to Israel. The Iranian leadership openly declares its intention to destroy Israel and has pursued this goal on multiple fronts: developing nuclear capabilities; building a large arsenal of surface-to-surface missiles (SSMs), unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and cruise missiles; deploying proxies including Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iraqi militias and assisting Hamas; carrying out terrorist activities in Israel and abroad. In addition, Iran transfers weapons and funding to terrorist organizations in Judea and Samaria and seeks to destabilize moderate regimes in the region.
At the same time, currently Iran is experiencing a severe internal crisis—its economy is collapsing, there are shortages of water and energy, public unrest is rising, and it is exposed to Israeli-American strikes. This point of weakness presents a window of opportunity for Israel in 2025–2026 to leverage its strategic advantage over Tehran.
In recent years, Israel has operated mainly within the framework of the “campaign between wars” (CBW)—targeted killings, strikes in Syria and Iraq, and attacks on senior Iranian figures. In the large-scale Operation Rising Lion in June 2025, nuclear sites, missile launchers, air defense batteries, and some regime symbols in Iran were attacked. Nevertheless, Iran continued missile and UAV fire toward Israel directly and through its proxies, especially the Houthis. The naval blockade in the Red Sea, which caused economic and psychological damage to Israel, and the continued surface-to-surface missile fire toward Israel, illustrated that airstrikes alone do not provide deterrence.
This chapter proposes that Israel’s policy should be based on two complementary principles:
- Undermining the stability of the Iranian regime– The fall of the current regime must be the long-term strategic objective, since as long as it exists, it will continue to seek Israel’s destruction. This can be advanced through heavy economic sanctions, kinetic operations inside Iran, strikes on energy infrastructure, cyber activity, mobilizing and supporting internal opposition and minorities, and conducting an influence campaign aimed at removing the “barrier of fear” among the Iranian public.
- Imposing direct responsibility on Iran– It should be established that any hostile action by its proxies (UAVs, missiles, or terrorism) will lead to a direct response against Iranian targets. This step would make clear to Tehran that it cannot hide behind proxies and would compel it to restrain them.
To enable this, Israel needs a diverse firepower array that complements the Air Force, including surface-to-surface missiles and large quantities of low-cost UAVs, enabling rapid, sustained responses at varying levels of intensity—up to creating a dilemma for Iran whereby continuing proxy attacks it risks sliding into a broader direct confrontation.
Regarding the Houthis and the Iraqi militias, the article proposes additional strike options: eliminating senior leaders (such as Abdul-Malik al-Houthi), targeting regime and economic infrastructure, and applying international pressure. In Iraq, it argues that pressure should also be directed at regime power centers themselves in order to compel the government to restrain the militias.
In conclusion, Israel faces a historic strategic opportunity to exploit Iran’s weakness. A shift is required from a policy of limited responses against proxies to a comprehensive offensive policy—applying maximum pressure to undermine the regime while establishing a clear deterrence equation: for every attack on Israel, Iran will pay a direct price.