Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday that Iran poses a "grave threat" for Israel as well as the whole world, and urged the international community "to act with determination."
His remarks come in the wake of a series of revelations about Iran's nuclear program which has made Israel more concerned than ever.
But analysts believe that there is precious little the Jewish state can do about the perceived threat, for the time being.
NEW REVELATIONS
Among the recent developments is renewed concern about the level of access being afforded to international weapons inspectors at nuclear sites in Iran. Questions are being asked of Iran regarding the nuclear facility at Qom, southwest of Tehran.
Meanwhile, a report in The Times on Tuesday suggested that outgoing International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Mohamed ElBaradei has been secretly negotiating a deal with Iran to allow it to continue with its nuclear program.
When the IAEA meets at the end of next week, delegates will discuss the latest information available on nuclear developments in Iran, where reports suggest there may be a series of nuclear sites.
All of this is cause for concern in Israel, which, along with the United States and some other countries, has been accusing Iran of secretly
developing nuclear weapons under the guise of civilian programs. While Iran insists that its nuclear plan is only for peaceful purposes.
"The threat that Iran poses is very grave for Israel, for peace in the Middle East and the whole world. Without any doubt, we are the first target,
but not the last," Netanyahu said on Tuesday while touring Israel's naval headquarters in Haifa.
"I can assure you there is growing awareness that Iran must stop arming itself, we expect the international community to act with etermination," he said.
UNILATERAL APPROACH BY WASHINGTON?
The Israeli government is worried not only by developments in Iran but also in the diplomatic arena as negotiations with Tehran become increasingly complex and dragged out.
The international community still differs on dealing with the Iran issue, especially when considering tougher sanctions against Iran.
Another factor is seemingly internal division in Iran over the international offer for uranium to be enriched on its part overseas. Some in
Tehran are in agreement with the suggestion, while others see this as an unacceptable challenge to Iran's sovereignty.
A further consideration is the change that is about to take place at the head of the IAEA. In a matter of days, ElBaradei completes his term in
office and will be replaced by Japan's Yukiya Amano.
Amano will have to be given a fair crack at the whip before any decisions can be made, Shlomo Aronson, a professor of political science at
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said.
As a result of all these factors, Obama may be tempted to adopt a unilateral approach, said Aronson. That would involve, for example, the U.S.
telling some companies that are very active in Iran that they can no longer operate in Iran while enjoy business relations with U.S. firms.
ISRAEL ON HOLD
The next thing Israel can do is to place the threat of military action on the table in a far more overt way than it has done until now, said
Aronson. It was very useful for Israel that this week the French decided to state publicly that if the international community fails to agree on a path forwards, Israel will be forced to act then, the professor added.
"The Israelis saw the new American approach to Iran as being misguided from the outset," said Glen Rangwala, an expert on the Middle East at
Cambridge University in Britain.
The fact that Iran failed to agree to the terms laid out in negotiations with the international community over the last few weeks is
seen by Israel as yet more validation of its suspicions about the value of talks with Iran.
"If Israel sees the Americans becoming increasingly frustrated with the Iranians, as they may well do at some point down the line, the Israelis will put the military option back on the table," said Rangwala.
For now, however, Washington is talking about the need for time, he said. That is a clear message to the Israelis that they should not be taking action at the moment.
However, given the fluidity in the relationship between Iran and the United States and indeed the international community, the current rules of the diplomatic game may change very quickly.
If, for instance, there is considerable anger on the part of the White House, the military option could conceivably come back into play, said
Rangwala.
Clearly, any smoking gun in terms of a secret Iranian military nuclear program would be cause for Israel to push for a strike. So far that type of evidence has not been found.
The Americans would not want to sanction any attack on Iran unless they were 100 percent certain. The American experience from its operation in Iraq has taught the Obama administration that it and its allies cannot act unless they are totally convinced of their case.