Israel has reportedly completed its military preparations for another confrontation with Iran, conducting repeated long-range air exercises towards Iranian territory as Washington considers whether to resume its attacks on Tehran.
But despite the military build-up, the decision to launch another offensive remains beyond Israel’s immediate control.
According to Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, US President Donald Trump is weighing military options presented by the commander of US Central Command, Admiral Brad Cooper, while simultaneously considering a diplomatic agreement with Iran.
The developments suggest that another round of hostilities is being actively prepared for, even as fundamental questions remain unanswered about what renewed American and Israeli attacks could realistically achieve.
Israeli political sources cited by the newspaper said Israel was approaching another possible confrontation with Iran, but acknowledged that the timing and direction of any military escalation would depend largely on Washington.
Israeli Fighter Jets Rehearse Routes Towards Iran
Israel’s military preparations have moved beyond planning discussions.
According to Yedioth Ahronoth, the Israeli air force has conducted several major exercises involving dozens of fighter jets and aerial refuelling aircraft, rehearsing potential attack routes across Syrian and Iraqi airspace towards the vicinity of Iran’s borders.
The exercises, reportedly repeated on multiple occasions, were designed to simulate flight paths that could be used in a future military offensive.
Israeli forces have also completed defensive and offensive preparations for several possible scenarios, including the resumption of direct military confrontation with Tehran.
The reported activities indicate that Israel is preparing not merely for the possibility of an Iranian response, but for the operational requirements of conducting another long-range attack.
Yet military readiness does not necessarily translate into political authorisation.
Israeli officials cited by the newspaper acknowledged that the decision to initiate another confrontation is tied to Trump’s calculations, leaving Israel dependent on Washington’s willingness to pursue military action rather than negotiations.
US Military Aircraft Arrive as Washington Considers Its Options
American military movements have accompanied the Israeli preparations.
Media reports cited by Yedioth Ahronoth indicated that 10 US military transport aircraft had arrived at Israeli air force bases over recent days.
The aircraft were reportedly part of an air bridge transporting military equipment into the region, coinciding with an expansion of the American military presence and preparations for the possible resumption of operations against Iran.
Meanwhile, Admiral Cooper presented Trump with a range of military options concerning renewed attacks on Iranian targets.
The discussions took place during a meeting attended by US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine.
Despite the presentation of these options, the meeting ended without a final decision to resume hostilities.
Washington therefore appears to be maintaining two potential courses of action: preparing the military capabilities necessary for another confrontation while preserving the possibility of reaching an agreement with Tehran.
The Problem Washington Has Yet to Resolve: What Would Another War Achieve?
Behind the military preparations lies a strategic dilemma that Israeli sources themselves have acknowledged.
Even if American and Israeli aircraft successfully strike Iran’s nuclear installations, missile infrastructure and other military capabilities, those attacks would not necessarily bring down the Iranian government or force Tehran to fundamentally change its policies.
This distinction between military destruction and political outcomes remains central to the debate over another offensive.
According to the sources cited by Yedioth Ahronoth, the United States has yet to establish sufficiently clear strategic objectives for a potential new operation.
The question is not simply whether Iranian facilities can be targeted from the air, but whether such strikes would produce the political and security outcomes Washington and Israel seek.
An alternative approach could involve using the threat of military force as leverage in negotiations.
Under that scenario, Washington could seek to pressure Tehran into accepting an agreement containing more favourable American terms without immediately launching another attack.
Israeli officials, however, remain concerned about the potential terms of any diplomatic settlement.
Sources quoted by the newspaper argued that any agreement failing to address Israel’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear programme, missile systems and broader military capabilities would leave unresolved what Israel considers its principal security threats.
Those concerns could complicate Washington’s diplomatic calculations, particularly if an agreement acceptable to the United States falls short of Israel’s demands.
Lebanon Could Become Another Front in a Renewed War
Israeli assessments also warn that another confrontation with Iran may not remain confined to Iranian territory.
The possibility of Hezbollah entering the fighting from Lebanon has emerged as a major concern in Israeli military planning.
Sources cited by the newspaper cautioned that Hezbollah’s involvement, as occurred during the previous confrontation, could expand the geographical scope of hostilities and prolong the fighting.
For Israel, that would create an additional military challenge.
A wider confrontation could place greater pressure on Israeli air defence systems while accelerating the consumption of interceptor missiles, which would be needed to respond to incoming attacks.
The prospect of simultaneous military pressure from Iran and Lebanon therefore introduces further uncertainty into the planning of another offensive.
It also raises questions about whether a renewed campaign against Tehran could be contained geographically or develop into a longer regional war.
Qatar-Mediated Talks Offer a Possible Alternative to War
While American and Israeli military preparations continue, diplomatic contacts between Washington and Tehran have reportedly made progress.
According to reports referenced by Yedioth Ahronoth, indirect communications between the United States and Iran, facilitated by Qatar, have advanced towards the possibility of direct negotiations.
The discussions reportedly cover several issues central to the confrontation, including Iran’s nuclear programme, the Strait of Hormuz and economic incentives that could be offered to Tehran as part of a negotiated settlement.
Another proposal under consideration would involve China and Russia serving as guarantors of a potential agreement between the two countries.
Such an arrangement would introduce additional international actors into efforts to establish a diplomatic framework acceptable to both Washington and Tehran.
However, progress in indirect communications has not eliminated the possibility of military escalation.
The continued movement of American military equipment into the region and Israel’s reported completion of operational preparations indicate that both military and diplomatic options remain active.
Iran Warns That Any New Attack Will Bring an Immediate Response
Tehran, meanwhile, has issued a warning against further military action.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, according to the Israeli newspaper, warned that any threat directed against Iran would face an immediate and consequential response, without geographical limitations.
He also emphasised that Iran’s armed forces and people would determine the timing and conditions under which any future confrontation would end.
The warning signals Tehran’s position that another military offensive would not necessarily remain limited to the targets, geographical boundaries or duration preferred by Washington and Israel.
It also reflects Iran’s determination to reject an arrangement in which its adversaries would unilaterally determine when hostilities begin and end.
After Months of Confrontation, Israel Still Faces the Question of What Comes Next
The latest preparations follow several rounds of military escalation involving Iran, Israel and the United States.
The confrontation began with American and Israeli attacks on Iran on 28 February, before a ceasefire was reached in April.
Hostilities between Washington and Tehran subsequently resumed in July, while negotiations between the two sides continued to encounter difficulties.
Against that background, Yedioth Ahronoth concluded that Israel’s principal challenge is no longer limited to preparing its military for another attack.
The more consequential question is whether a renewed offensive could deliver lasting results consistent with Israel’s strategic objectives.
That requires defining the goals of any operation, identifying the mechanisms through which hostilities would end and determining what political and military outcomes could realistically follow.
For now, Israel has reportedly completed its preparations, American commanders have presented their military options, and Iran has warned of a forceful response.
The decision confronting Trump is whether another round of military strikes would achieve what the previous confrontations failed to settle, or whether Washington will attempt to extract concessions from Tehran through negotiations backed by the threat of force.
