403
Sorry!!
Error! We're sorry, but the page you were looking for doesn't exist.
Experts Rebut Nuclear Claims in Israel’s War on Iran
(MENAFN) The assertion put forward by the United States, Israel, and several European allies—that Israel’s recent assault on Iran was a “pre-emptive” move to prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons—is being widely challenged as baseless. The rationale bears striking similarity to the discredited accusations used to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and this military action is being labeled by critics as equally unlawful.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has, for nearly 40 years, warned that Iran was close to developing a nuclear bomb. However, efforts to establish diplomatic agreements that would impose stricter oversight and limitations on Iran’s nuclear activities have repeatedly been undermined—largely due to Israeli opposition and the influence of its lobbying networks in key Western governments.
A factual review of Israel’s justification for the attack reveals significant gaps. Israeli officials maintain that their strike was preventative, yet have not provided concrete evidence that Iran was nearing nuclear armament. Mere assertions, without verifiable intelligence, do not constitute proof—echoing the narrative used by the U.S. in its flawed justification for the Iraq war, when it claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
In a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in March, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard clarified that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”
Adding to the context, Iran was actively engaged in indirect diplomatic talks with the United States aimed at reviving a restructured version of the 2015 Nuclear Deal. That original agreement was abruptly abandoned in 2018 when then-President Donald Trump declared a unilateral U.S. withdrawal, choosing instead to implement a “maximum pressure” sanctions strategy—reportedly under strong pressure from Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has, for nearly 40 years, warned that Iran was close to developing a nuclear bomb. However, efforts to establish diplomatic agreements that would impose stricter oversight and limitations on Iran’s nuclear activities have repeatedly been undermined—largely due to Israeli opposition and the influence of its lobbying networks in key Western governments.
A factual review of Israel’s justification for the attack reveals significant gaps. Israeli officials maintain that their strike was preventative, yet have not provided concrete evidence that Iran was nearing nuclear armament. Mere assertions, without verifiable intelligence, do not constitute proof—echoing the narrative used by the U.S. in its flawed justification for the Iraq war, when it claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
In a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in March, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard clarified that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”
Adding to the context, Iran was actively engaged in indirect diplomatic talks with the United States aimed at reviving a restructured version of the 2015 Nuclear Deal. That original agreement was abruptly abandoned in 2018 when then-President Donald Trump declared a unilateral U.S. withdrawal, choosing instead to implement a “maximum pressure” sanctions strategy—reportedly under strong pressure from Israel.
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the
information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept
any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images,
videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information
contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright
issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.

Comments
No comment