As tensions in the Middle East escalate following Israeli airstrikes on Iran, a leading national security expert says Israel has achieved a decisive advantage that could end Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
Robert Greenway, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for National Security, argues that Israel’s recent operations have crippled Iran’s military leadership, destroyed air defenses, and gained air superiority. Greenway shared his insights on the “Heritage Explains” podcast.
The following interview transcript has been edited for length and clarity.
Can you give us an account of the development in the Middle East? What’s happened? What’s changed in the situation over the last couple of days?
Robert Greenway: All of this was really initiated by the revelation—not surprisingly—that Iran was, in fact, pursuing a nuclear weapon and has gotten to the threshold.
All of that [was] enabled by the hundreds of billions of dollars that came in the form of appeasement in the Biden and Obama administrations.
Having gotten to the threshold, the IAEA—The International Atomic Energy Organization—that monitors the program came to the conclusion and issued a very unique and unprecedented censure capturing the fact that [Iran] had in fact developed the infrastructure that could not be accounted in any other way.
[Iran was] not being responsive to questions and addressing some of the discrepancies in the available information.
So, Israel determined that it had to act before Iran could obtain possession of a nuclear weapon, which it has sworn to use against its enemies, in this case, Israel and the United States.
In acting, Israel had seized the initiative, surprised Iran, and in a very short period of time managed to do critical things, which has expanded over the last couple of days.
The first is to be able to strike at regime leadership. The command and control, the individuals responsible for making decisions and supporting the supreme leader in making decisions were [figuratively] decapitated.
Up to 40 individuals that fill critical roles in their military and security apparatus have been killed, as well as experts in … the nuclear weapons development programs.
Second, they managed to take out all of the Iranian air defense systems that remained after October’s strikes that Israel took after responding to a ballistic missile attack.
Third, they have managed to gain air supremacy and air superiority as a result of taking out the air defenses and command and control facilities and the individuals responsible.
The last is they’ve been able to begin to attrit the retaliatory capacity, the ballistic missiles that Iran has long developed in order to threaten Israel and its neighbors in the region and ultimately developed an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering a nuclear payload against the United States.
Having done that, the strikes against Israel have begun to abate, and it’s not clear as to whether [Iran] no longer possess the inventory to [continue the strikes] or that Israel has taken away a means to deliver it.
Now, we’re at the point where the United States is determining whether or not it needs to be involved.
The reason essentially comes down to nuclear structures that are built to protect the centrifuge: cascades in hardened, deeply buried underground facilities of which there are two. One is being used and one could be used.
Both are buried some 300 feet underground, reinforced concrete structures built over decades and are beyond Israel’s capacity to defeat from the air with conventional weapons.
The capability to do that exists only in the US inventory. Now, President Trump and the national security team thankfully are assessing the situation and judging what’s required.
If you take a step back, where we’re at is the end of diplomatic resolution to the Iranian nuclear question.
The Israelis have acted and done so decisively and effectively that they’re at the cusp of eliminating that capability.
Not only did the Iranians reject the President Trump’s offer to negotiate an end, they also miss the window of opportunity.
Now it appears that the military solution will have ended the Iranian nuclear ambitions but may require US support to complete the action.
Is there a likelihood that America will engage militarily?
Greenway: In the last 24 hours, the president’s comments to the press, his tweets on X and on Truth Social all indicate that he’s moving in a direction and he’s sympathetic to the argument.
I think he recognizes most importantly it may be required to effectively end it.
The worst-case scenario here is where after Israel effectively neuters Iran that the capacity remains intact underground so that they would resurrect it and become a threat later.
I think [Trump’s] sympathetic to the argument that the United States can play a role here in closing that door completely so that Iran no longer has possession of a nuclear weapon, his primary and often repeated policy objective, which is the right one.
I think also that the circumstances now are clear enough to indicate too that Iran could never drag the United States into a war. It can’t defend itself against Israel, let alone the United States.
There never were plans to invade Iran, nor is that required under the circumstances. This could be a surgical strike and one for which the United States is well equipped.
There is not a scenario in which we’d be drug into an endless war.
In reality, this ends a war that started in 1979 that the Islamic Republic has been in against the United States and Israel. I think after doing this, we could be looking at an entirely different region for the first time in decades absent the Iranian threat.
Assuming that there is military action in Iran that eliminates the nuclear program, do we have some sense of what governance in Iran would look like post such an action?
Greenway: No, I think it’s impossible to predict.
You’re looking at really one or two outcomes, both of which are better than the current. Right now, you have a maniacal state sponsor of terrorism led by a religious fanatic committed to the destruction of Israel and the United States.
The other two alternatives, as a result of this series of actions taken by Israel and potentially United States, would leave Iran probably without the rule of Supreme Leader [Ali] Khamenei and his ilk.
Iran could return to its democratic roots, which predate the ‘79 revolution. There are those that believe that the Shah’s son [Reza Pahlavi], now living in the United States, could potentially return to power and organize a democratic movement.
There is some sympathy, as far as we know, on the ground inside of Iran for that. There are a number of active resistance groups, but the repression of the state has prevented them from organizing inside.
They have organized externally and outside of Iran and they’ve been hunted down mercilessly.
There is broad support for a change in governing structure inside of Iran, insofar as we know. It would undoubtedly take time for this to take shape and materialize.
However, if the alternative was collapse, it still would be preferable in this sense. Even if it takes time for them to sort out what a new governing structure would look like, they would no longer have the capacity to threaten the United States, Israel, our neighbors and interests in the region.
That ultimately is the better day that we can envision after this.
Of course, Israel is currently engaged in the war in Gaza. What are the implications for this conflict? Can Israel fight both of these at the same time?
Greenway: Right now, they are, because the conflict in Gaza is in its very final stages. It requires some, but not all of Israel’s military might. It is predominantly a ground fight.
The fight in Iran has been from the air, has been an intelligence operation and a battle for air supremacy, which Israel has won. No ground forces are required for that.
So, right now, you’ve got different elements of the Israeli defense forces engaged. Having concluded the conflict with Iran successfully, it puts Israel in a much stronger regional position.
What is your advice for folks who are watching this conflict unfold?
Greenway: First, they should be remarkably encouraged, one that this threat has been confronted.
We’re no longer living in a world in which Israel and the United States are concerned about the development of a nuclear weapon in the hands of a maniacal terrorist regime.
Second, that this is not a piece of paper or a guarantee, that has often [been] violated by Iran, [that] is the only thing that stands between us.
This could be a definitive end to the nuclear program. It could even be a definitive end to Iran as a threat.
What that ultimately means is the region could be shaped in a way in which we would no longer be confronted with the ever-present reality of a conflict in the Middle East.
Lastly, I would say again, there’s no scenario envisioned in which the US will be drawn into a ground war of any kind or an endless war that we’ve seen in the Middle East previously.
For the first time in decades, I think I can say I’m optimistic about the trajectory regardless of how uncertain it may be in the near term.
