As a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran struggles to take hold, what comes next? Asher Fredman breaks down Israel’s next steps and strategy on this week’s A MINUTE ON.

Meir Ben Shabbat: Anyone who expects the regime in Iran to behave according to the Western way of thinking, which examines profit and loss considerations in every move, does not understand what a religious, stubborn, and determined regime this is.

The only thing that can cause change is a threat to the regime’s survival. Iran’s behavior shows that it does not think it is at this point yet.

Published in The Times of Israel, June  22, 2025.

Israel’s strike last week against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and ballistic missile program, as well as President Trump’s bold decision to strike the Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan nuclear sites, has drawn the usual handwringing from parts of the international community, including in Australia.

Critics accuse Israel, and the United States, of destabilising the region and acting outside the bounds of international law. But the facts — and the law — tell a very different story.

First, with respect to Israel’s action, which initiated this campaign last week, it needs to underscored that this was not an act of aggression. It was a lawful and necessary measure against a genocidal regime that has vowed to destroy the world’s only Jewish state — and stood on the cusp of acquiring the means to do so, had Israel not acted.

To understand why, we must begin with a fundamental truth: Israel was already engaged in an ongoing armed conflict with the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has called the Jewish state a “cancerous tumour” that “must be eradicated.”

For decades, Iran has been the greatest source of destabilization and instability in the Middle East, while carrying out repeated acts of aggression against Israel through their vast network of terror proxies — from Hezbollah in Lebanon, to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza, to the Houthis in Yemen.

The October 7th massacre — the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust — was carried out by Hamas with Iranian money, weapons, and training.

And in April and October 2024, Iran escalated further, launching direct missile and drone attacks on Israel from its own territory. These were not isolated provocations but ongoing acts of armed conflict.

The reality is that, despite the best efforts of the U.S. Administration, diplomacy had failed.

In the lead-up to Israel’s strike, intelligence showed Iran enriching uranium to near-weapons grade, with capacity to build at least nine warheads. Ayatollah Khamenei himself had directed a covert group of scientists to assemble the components for a nuclear bomb and construct fortified underground facilities to conceal the work.

Then the International Atomic Energy Agency, for the first time in two decades, formally declared Iran in breach of its nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

Iran was now on the precipice of nuclear no return.

Faced with an existential and imminent threat, the Jewish state had no choice but to act before it was too late, as no doubt Australia would have, were it faced with the same threat.

Accordingly, Israel’s actions must be perceived within the bounds of the laws of armed conflict. Once a conflict exists, states may lawfully target enemy military objectives, as defined in the Geneva Conventions and customary international law, provided they observe the principles of distinction, necessity, and proportionality – which they have been in this case.

Iran’s nuclear weapons program, ballistic missile infrastructure and key military officials and scientists leading the nuclear weapons development program, clearly qualify as military objectives. These targets contribute to Iran’s war-making capability, and their neutralization offers a definite military advantage.

And whilst Iran presented an existential threat to the State of Israel, it was also a national security threat to the United States, and the region as a whole.

Just as they chanted ‘Death to Israel’, they chanted ‘Death to America’. They had the blood of hundreds of American forces and civilians on their hands. They closed off shipping routes. They tried to kill President Trump and other U.S. officials. IRGC assassins operated on U.S. soil.

And as President Trump stated in his address to the nation following U.S. strikes, “Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror.”

To be clear, the President did not require Congressional approval to conduct the military operation.

Under Art. II of the U.S. Constitution, the President as Commander-in-Chief, has authority to use military force to protect the national security and defend U.S. interests. Obama invoked it in taking out bin Laden in 2011 and Biden when U.S. bombed Iranian proxies in Syria in 2021.

The President’s decision to strike Iran is also reinforced under War Powers Resolution Act (1973) and the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), as well as the “inherent right of individual or collective self-defence” under Article 51 of the UN Charter.

In striking Iran’s nuclear weapons program, Israel and the United States made the world a safer place. They did it not only in their own defense, but in defense of the free world. Australia should acknowledge this and unequivocally stand with their allies.

Published in Financial Review, June  22, 2025.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, is facing one of the most critical and decisive moments of his life and political career. His lifelong mission—to preserve the Islamic Revolution entrusted to him by Khomeini in 1989—is now under unprecedented threat.
Despite his June 18 warning to Trump not to enter the war or suffer “irreversible consequences,” the U.S. ignored him. Early this morning (June 22), American forces struck Iran’s nuclear facilities, including its crown jewel: the underground Fordow site.
Khamenei’s threats are losing their potency. He had repeatedly insisted Israel was incapable of striking Iran—until Israel proved him wrong, eliminating top commanders in their sleep in a surprise attack. The regime is now also losing its frontline nuclear scientists, critical to advancing and safeguarding Iran’s nuclear expertise—long a source of pride and deterrence for Khamenei.
The Supreme Leader has vowed a response. Since this morning, the regime has issued escalating threats. Yet Khamenei never intended to find himself in such a position of distress. Arriving here is a profound failure of strategic judgment.
Iran’s national security doctrine centers on avoiding direct war, preferring to operate through proxies painstakingly built over decades. Now, with Assad’s regime collapsed and Hezbollah defeated by Israel, Iran stands exposed and vulnerable—despite Khamenei’s recent insistence that the resistance axis remains strong.
He must now decide whether to strike U.S. assets in the region—potentially triggering a full-scale war with America. This would mark a radical departure from past strategy, and Iran’s own military brass have admitted their inferiority in any direct confrontation. Yet inaction could be equally dangerous, signaling weakness and inviting further escalation.
By clinging to Iran’s “right” to enrich uranium, Khamenei is now risking his life’s work—and possibly the regime’s survival.
This is Khamenei’s first war as Supreme Leader. In the 1980s, Iran fought a brutal eight-year war with Iraq. But since then, it has projected power through proxy wars in Iraq, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen—even parts of Africa. That strategy has now collapsed.
Iranian society has changed dramatically in recent years. The regime cannot survive a war of attrition. Yet provoking U.S. intervention could shake the very foundations of the Islamic Republic. With national internet access cut off to suppress unrest, the specter of a fourth revolution in 200 years looms.
Khamenei is now searching for a way to preserve the regime’s fragile balance—without handing the United States and Israel a historic victory.

Published in Alma, June  23, 2025.

Ruth Wasserman Lande: I would say the biggest conflict is not the Israeli-Arab conflict or the Islamic-Jewish conflict, but rather the one between radical Sunni Islamists and radical Shiite Islamists.

In other words, the Shiite axis led by the Islamic Republic of Iran, and on the Sunni side, an axis essentially led by several actors — Erdogan of Turkey, Qatar, and others — who fund, train, and actively support the radical Sunni Islamists.

The interview took place on Channel I24 on June 19, 2025.

Ruth Wasserman Lande: “Now that Iran’s access and influence have been significantly weakened — and before they are completely eliminated — this is the time to apply pressure on Qatar and the Hamas leadership comfortably based there. Not on those on the ground, who have already lost everything and have nothing left to lose. They’ve lost. All they can do now is harass the IDF and inflict more harm on our soldiers and civilians. The only leverage they still hold is our poor hostages. What must be done now is for Israel and the United States to translate their military successes into diplomatic pressure on Qatar and the Hamas leadership there. The message should be: If you want anything out of this situation, release all our hostages. Now is the time.”

The interview took place on Channel I24, 19 June, 2025.

Meir Ben Shabbat: In the war it is waging for its survival. Israel is providing the countries of the region and the free world with hope to break free from the looming shadow of Iran. The Gulf States know very well who was behind the attacks on Aramco facilities and on Abu Dhabi, who arms, trains, and funds the Houthis, who is trying to establish a foothold in Sudan, and most dangerously — who is building nuclear capabilities, an army, and ballistic missiles that would allow it to tyrannize any country at will.

The gap between public statements and true intentions is yet another proof of the fear the Islamist regime has instilled in the region. With God’s help, once the war ends and Iran is no longer able to pose a strategic threat to the countries and the region, I foresee a significant expansion in the circle of alliances with Israel. The region will change its face. A new light will shine from the darkness that Iran has brought upon it.

Published in Il Foglio daily, June  19, 2025.

Dr. David Wurmser in JNS: The Middle East is at the edge between a tremendous strategic improvement or a strategic descent into an endless war, and to avoid endless war, we should go for decisive results and get rid of this regime that has haunted the region and the world for the last 46 years.

If we don’t solve the problem now, America will be bogged down into endless wars in the region, because Iran will start them.

The full interview was published in JNS, in June 17, 2025.

Prof. Zaki Shalom: There is a good chance that the United States would be willing to undertake a strike against Fordow.

Israel needs American involvement in the war with B2 bombers, which can carry bombs of about 14 tonnes.

Published in CGTN, June  18, 2025.