Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Israel has destroyed Iran’s nuclear weapons production infrastructure and established durable security zones in Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon. That declaration of victory now collides directly with the persistent reality of the 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent — sufficient for at least 10 nuclear weapons once further refined — which lies buried beneath rubble at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

The Jewish State fights for survival against a regime that has pledged its annihilation since 1979 and is fully aware that obviating these clear gaps is suicidal. Nevertheless, President Trump’s erratic pronouncements are menacing and confirm why the real purpose of the United States in this war remains opaque and inconsistent. This ambiguity sadly explains why the deployed forces operate without a coherent and serious strategy to secure the Strait of Hormuz beyond standard patrols by the United States Fifth Fleet. Thus, if this war is merely meant to prop up the American defense industry, then it should be stated plainly. But wasting our time trying to sell different parallel realities every eight hours is exhausting.

Before the war, President Trump assumed that confronting the regime would rally universal support; in reality, only Israel stood with him. Now, after delivering real blows, a Vietnam-style retreat would signal something far worse: a willingness to let the mullahs survive, regroup, and later punish hesitant allies—teaching them exactly what insufficient loyalty costs.

This half-measure approach hands the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps precisely the breathing room it requires to consolidate domestic power. The corps already broadcasts a narrative of divine resilience and draws immediate economic and technical assistance from Russia and China. Without decisive pressure, Tehran will certainly continue to exploit every window of opportunity, turning international hesitation into a strategic advantage.

A genuine and committed geostrategic victory demanded four non-negotiable steps. First, a multidimensional operation to recover the full 440.9-kilogram enriched uranium stockpile. Second, a seizure or sustained naval blockade of Kharg Island to eliminate more than 90 percent of the regime’s hard-currency oil revenue and free the Strait of Hormuz from the Iranian thug’s cloak. Third, direct pressure on the South Pars field to choke 70 to 75 percent of national gas production and collapse the domestic energy supply. Fourth, implementation of the Israeli Mossad plan to provide military aid and strategic backing to the Kurdish and Baloch opposition movements to ignite internal fronts and stretch regime security forces thin.

Undeniably, each step would have brought even greater global economic challenges and tougher political risks ahead of the 2026 U.S. midterm election. However, resilient commitment on those terms is the only way to yield a decisive strategic military victory capable of securing the White House in 2028 and restoring credible American deterrence throughout the region.

Predictably, any half-measure will leave the region’s allies hedging their bets, forcing Sunni Arab States like Saudi Arabia to pivot decisively toward new security partnerships. During this war, Riyadh has recently formalized a defense partnership with Ukraine. Yet MBS’s kingdom recalibration toward Kyiv and away from its earlier ties with Moscow reflects a broader realignment in Gulf security thinking — one driven by shared concerns over Tehran’s growing reach but constrained by the limits of American commitment.

However, this distancing from Moscow is concerning. By no longer maintaining that level of closeness and influence in the Russian capital, a key Western-aligned ally like Saudi Arabia risks strengthening even further the Russian-Iranian-Chinese axis.

The Sunni Arab States share Israel’s interest in a weakened Iran, but they decline to deliver the final blow absent complete American logistical and air support. Therefore, if Washington withdraws, those states must choose to continue the military campaign against Iran alongside Israel unilaterally—or cower and live once again under the terror omnipresence of Iranian power.

Regional stability requires the theocratic regime’s destruction, not its managed survival. Spurning this reality risks a long-locked Strait of Hormuz—since President Trump is poised to flee before the consequences, echoing President Biden’s Afghan blunder—and leaves Tehran free to levy a maritime toll that will force the Sunni Arab States to bet their security on the Ayatollahs’ volatile whims.

With all this at stake, and in that casa, Israel should immediately suspend every foreign military export contract and redirect every drone, missile, and precision-guided munition into its own operations against Iran and declare its military equipment independence from the West. We, the Jewish people, did not survive 2,000 years of exile and return merely to subordinate our security to American electoral calendars and antisemitic tantrums.

Given this reality, it would not be surprising to see Vice President JD Vance steering the administration toward a ‘low-key’ arms embargo designed to compel Israel to halt operations—a move many European governments would eagerly endorse to regain favor in Washington (especially now that Trump is threatening with leaving NATO) and to satisfy “modern” Europe’s impulse to sideline and officially demonize the Jewish State.

Moreover, President Trump’s retreat wind carries immediate and structural costs. It could power the extreme right-isolationist current inside the Republican Party that Vice President Vance fosters — a faction that promotes multipolarity, regards Israel as a problem rather than a geostrategic asset (in clear contrast with Tucker Carlson’s ideological rhetorical crusade), and sees Russia, Turkey, and Qatar as reliable and indispensable allies. In parallel, the half-measures will likely fuel the extreme-left anti-Western rhetoric inside the Democratic Party, supplying its activist core with the precise narrative required for an internal takeover and push their electoral agenda. The identical dynamic will bolster the international left too, particularly in places like Spain and the United Kingdom, where every Western action in the Middle East is routinely portrayed as “imperialist aggression”.

Regrettably, if President Trump is reckless enough to apply the same failed geopolitical patchwork policy to Cuba that he botched in Venezuela—and now seems hell-bent on repeating the fiasco in Iran—he might as well achieve absolutely nothing.

The data remain unambiguous. 440.9 kilograms of 60-percent-enriched uranium. 1.5 million barrels of oil are exported daily. 90 percent of that oil is routed through a single Iranian-controlled island. 70 percent of the national gas output comes from a single field. These figures delineate both the regime’s residual strength and the narrow window still available to the United States to close it permanently.

President Trump can confront these realities, recognize the empirical American air and naval losses, accept the necessary costs, and secure victory—or retreat into legacy-preserving half-measures that will cost his party the midterms, the 2028 presidential election, and the cohesion of the West, and drive the Ayatollah’s regime towards an even greater commitment to achieve the atomic bomb.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)