Israel’s dramatic initial strike against Iran was a significant achievement in terms of military coordination and intelligence execution, but it will not be enough to entirely eliminate Iran’s nuclear capabilities without American involvement, said Sima Shine, a former senior Mossad official.
Shine expressed genuine admiration for the precision and synchronization displayed by both the Mossad and the IDF in launching Operation Rising Lion. She described the attack as a masterclass in planning and execution. Nevertheless, she emphasized that dismantling the entirety of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would require active U.S. participation.
Now heading the Iran and Shiite Axis research program at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), Shine had previously led the Mossad’s Research Division. She offered her insights during a briefing following the surprise Israeli campaign on June 13, which struck more than 100 military and nuclear targets across Iran.
Although Tehran has already begun its retaliation, Shine warned that much more is likely to come. “Everything in their capacity will be used,” she cautioned, urging the Israeli public to closely follow directives issued by the Home Front Command.
She said that Iran’s response might not be conventional, and could include asymmetric attacks by dormant terror networks stationed internationally—especially in Europe—something the regime has attempted before. Iran might also take steps on the diplomatic front, such as quitting the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and expelling international inspectors.
Since Israel’s opening strike, Iran has been launching daily barrages of missiles and drones, some of which have inflicted serious damage on major Israeli cities including Tel Aviv and Haifa. A state of emergency has been declared, and the country’s defense systems—both civilian and military—remain in a heightened state of readiness.
Shine warned that Tehran’s vengeance may be intense enough to spark a broader regional war. She noted that attacks from the Houthis in Yemen are expected to persist despite recent mixed signals from Iran’s network of allied groups. Hezbollah, for instance, issued a rare public statement: “Hezbollah will not initiate its own attack on Israel in retaliation for Israel’s strikes.”
She pointed out that Iran’s affiliates in Iraq are in a precarious position, especially after Iraq’s Prime Minister made it clear that his government has no interest in joining the current conflict. This is a stark departure from the atmosphere last year when Iran’s so-called “ring of fire” was fully ablaze.
“Israel cannot probably take out completely the nuclear project on its own without the American participation,” she said. “If the US will not be a part of the war, I assume that Iran will have some parts of the nuclear project remain from my point of view, this is a huge point of question mark to what will happen after.”
She elaborated that several key nuclear sites in Iran are located deep underground, making them extremely difficult to destroy completely. “This does not mean that Israel will not attack it and will not damage them,” she said. “In order to make sure this program cannot be rebuilt, in the same places where it is now, there is a need for American involvement.”
On the diplomatic front, Shine noted an unusually strong consensus between Israel, the U.S., and Europe. “No question of daylight between us and the Europeans and the Americans about the evilness of the regime and the destabilizing role of Iran in the Middle East,” she remarked.
For the moment, Israel is pressing forward with momentum. But the question remains: Will Washington join the campaign directly? Shine suggests this decision will determine whether Iran’s nuclear program is merely disrupted—or fully dismantled. The real danger, she warned, lies in the possibility that the most threatening elements of the program will remain untouched.
Shine characterized Operation Rising Lion not as a singular operation, but as the opening chapter of a larger confrontation. She pointed out that the situation unfolding now deserves to be described as a full-scale war. The term “operation,” she explained, implies limited scope and duration, while this campaign was clearly designed to hit a broad set of targets over an extended period.
She expects tit-for-tat escalation going forward, noting: “Once Iran retaliates, Israel will again retaliate.”
Israel’s June 13 strikes hit Iran’s nuclear facilities, its missile and air defense systems, and command centers belonging to the IRGC and military. In the following days, the scope of the operation widened. On June 14 and 15, Israeli forces bombed Iranian oil and gas infrastructure. By the third day, strikes were hitting Tehran and surrounding regions, while diplomatic negotiations in Oman fell apart as a result of the ongoing escalation.
The attacks intensified further on June 16 and 17, with Israeli jets targeting Iran’s Foreign Ministry and the headquarters of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB). The IRIB compound was struck during a live broadcast, causing massive explosions.
Shine stated that Iran’s response calculus will depend largely on two factors: how its population reacts and whether the regime’s grip on power begins to show signs of stress.
International reactions to Israel’s operation have been varied. Shine views Iran as part of a strategic axis involving Russia and China, all of whom are seeking to challenge American influence globally.
“It is no question that Iran is part of the war in Ukraine,” she said, pointing to the well-documented supply chain of drones and other weapons from Tehran to Moscow that has kept the fighting alive. She also noted that China has recently supplied missile fuel to Iran. These partnerships, she added, are rooted in shared interests—but those interests are not necessarily identical. “These states have mutual interest but not all their interests are mutual.”
Initially, the U.S. distanced itself from the June 13 strikes. Secretary of State Marco Rubio made clear: “Israel acted independently… we’re not involved.”
According to Shine, that statement was a deliberate move to shield American assets in the region from potential retaliation. “It was important for the US to make a statement distancing themselves to try to ensure that Iranians do not touch US interests in the region.”
Still, on June 17, Trump made headlines when he called for Iran’s “unconditional surrender.”
In Shine’s view, even though Israel showcased exceptional operational prowess on the first day of strikes, eliminating Iran’s nuclear project in its entirety is beyond its solo capabilities. For that, U.S. cooperation is not just helpful. It’s essential.
{Matzav.com Israel}