WANA (Jun 12) – To answer why Netanyahu is so eager to attack Iran, it is necessary to consider many factors, especially one. First and foremost, time is on Iran’s side, and the key advantage of the indirect nuclear negotiations lies precisely in this: the passage of time works in Iran’s favor.

 

Secondly, Netanyahu seeks to instill the belief that the resistance can be defeated, and he wants to cite a proven track record to support that notion.

 

However, the time elapsed from the start of the Muscat negotiations on April 11, 2025, to June 12, 2025, has tilted the balance increasingly in favor of the resistance and to the detriment of the Israeli regime:

 

In the defense arena, the Islamic Republic of Iran successfully tested, mass-produced, and upgraded heavy, precision-strike missiles such as the “Qassem Basir” and other warheads weighing up to two tons, along with strategic air defense systems, including anti-ballistic platforms.

Iranian Air defense system, Arman. Social media/ WANA News Agency

In the military field, Iran had the opportunity to implement key updates across strategic, tactical, and operational levels. It is crucial to understand a key concept: American and Israeli forces, by virtue of their classic structure, are forces already on the field—they possess existing capabilities that must merely be repositioned.

 

If subjected to time erosion, their effectiveness deteriorates. In contrast, anti-Western forces like Iran are still in development, meaning they can continue to eliminate weaknesses, innovate new weapons and tactics, deploy them across the region, and enhance their readiness, gaining strength as time progresses.

 

In the intelligence and security sphere, Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Armed Forces carried out successful combined operations against the Israeli regime, including the extraction and transfer of nuclear documents. On the defensive side, dozens of terrorist and sabotage attempts across the country were thwarted as in the past.

 

In the economic domain, despite being influenced by negotiation news, the Iranian government managed to maintain relative currency stability and avoided severe market shocks.

 

In foreign policy and diplomacy, negotiations between Iran and the United States advanced, causing even a tactical rift between Trump and Netanyahu. At the same time, political divisions within the Israeli regime deepened significantly.

 

In the nuclear domain, Iran unveiled its third secure enrichment site, laying the groundwork for future developments, and also demonstrated a tenfold increase in enrichment speed at Fordow using advanced generation-six centrifuges.

 

All of these developments contributed to the growing strategic advantage of Tehran over time.

 

However, the regional arena witnessed the most significant development: Yemen’s victory against the U.S., the deepening of Israel’s entanglement in the Gaza quagmire, and Yemeni forces’ attritional attacks on Lod Airport, which single-handedly collapsed Netanyahu’s cherished myth—that Israel could defeat the Resistance. Meanwhile, Hezbollah in Lebanon grew stronger and more entrenched, and Syrian Resistance officially resumed activity.

 

Naturally, Iran faced its share of challenges during this period. The worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the assassination of Mohammad Sinwar, U.S. and Israeli attacks on Yemen, domestic issues such as energy imbalance, incidents like the Bandar Abbas explosion, and Damascus’ advancement of normalization efforts—all had a negative impact. However, most of these were tactical, localized, and short-term in nature.

 

Taken together, the developments of the past three months have shaped a new perception in Tel Aviv: every passing day further undermines the regime’s regional standing, and the window of opportunity to strike Iran is rapidly closing.