“If Iran attacks Tel Aviv, it will have hundreds of Israeli planes overhead and the regime would risk its survival”

In his most direct comments, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned the weekend that a US military attack would not leave Iran with its arms crossed and that its reaction would trigger a “regional war” throughout the Middle East.

SEE ALSO: Iran’s warning to the US that once again turns on the alert of an all-out war in the Middle East

He added that Washington’s threats do not scare the Iranian people.

Before the “12 day war” with Israel, which began on June 13, 2025, Iran had stored some 3,000 missiles short, medium and long range ballistic missiles, according to Western intelligence assessments and media such as The Jerusalem Post. It was his most feared arsenal.

According to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW)Israel destroyed between 35% and 45% of that ballistic missile arsenal. However, after the conflict Iran It has been rebuilding its arsenal to reach pre-war levels, so a US attack would disrupt that effort.

The ISW also maintains that Iran has taken steps to rebuild its nuclear program and reinforce its nuclear facilities against future air attacks, as happened in the “12-day war” with the United States bombing of its underground plants such as Fordow.

According to the Institute for Science and International Security, Iran is coating a newly constructed facility at Taleghan 2, at the Parchin Military Complex, with a “sarcophagus” concrete to reinforce it against possible air attacks.

American intelligence has also discovered that Iran is trying to rebuild its nuclear facilities “deeper”according to CNN.

In this context of crossed threats, the president of Iran, Masud Pezeshkianagreed this week to negotiate with the United States.

However, Trump doesn’t just want Iran to end its nuclear program. It also seeks to limit the range and number of its ballistic missiles, and the end of support for regional groups grouped in the Resistance Axisof which Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis of Yemen and militias from Iraq and Syria are part.

Iran, between military weakness and the temptation to cross the nuclear line

The Commerce spoke about the complex situation in Iran and its military response capacity with Henrique Cymermana prominent Israeli journalist of Portuguese and Spanish origin, recognized for his extensive coverage of the conflict in the Middle East.

Cymerman maintains that Iran is militarily weakened, but not neutralized. Its current strategy is focused on buying time and advancing its nuclear program. The journalist considers that the “12-day war” with Israel and the final bombings by the United States represented “the strongest blow that the Islamic Republic has received since the 1979 Revolution.”

According to Cymerman, during that conflict The Israeli Air Force achieved complete control of Iranian airspace for almost two weekseven though Iran It is a country “eighty times larger than Israel.” This dominance allowed it to attack strategic nuclear facilities and degrade part of the Iranian missile arsenal, including ballistic missiles, in addition to severely hitting its regional allies, the so-called “Circle of Fire”.

However, the analyst warns that Tehran did not abandon its central strategy: crossing the “line of no return” at the nuclear level. In his vision, The Iranian regime seeks to replicate the North Korean modelconvinced that having a nuclear capability would grant it a form of immunity from direct military attacks from the United States or Israel. “They keep trying silently”he points out.

In parallel, Iran works on accelerated reconstruction of its missile power. During the war, launched about 550 missiles against Israel and, according to Cymerman, around 70 managed to hit. The lesson for Tehran would have been clear: it must increase the number of projectiles capable of evading Israeli defense systems, a threat that the analyst defines as real and persistent.

Still, Cymerman emphasizes that the regime faces its most critical internal moment since 1979with a majority social opposition and growing political fragility. In that context, considers it unlikely that Iran will opt for a direct and massive response against Tel Aviv if the United States launches an attacksince that would provoke a devastating reaction that could put the survival of the regime itself at risk.

“If they attack Tel Aviv, they know that at that moment they will not only have the US army, but they will have hundreds of Israeli planes flying over Iranian airspace.. “They have no way to defend themselves… Israel would attack with everything, and that would perhaps cause the fall of the regime, or the disappearance of the regime, which is ultimately the only thing they care about protecting, the survival of the regime and hegemony as much as possible in the Middle East,” Cymerman says.

The most likely alternative, he maintains, would be limited or indirect retaliation: symbolic attacks against Israel, blows against US bases in Gulf countries – such as Qatar, Bahrain or the United Arab Emirates – or actions against Washington’s regional allies. “They will have to do something”he affirms, although taking care not to cross a threshold that triggers a total offensive.

As for the nuclear programCymerman believes that Iran’s willingness to dialogue with the United States responds to a clear tactic: buy time and dilute military pressure. Tehran could accept partial limits on uranium enrichment and greater international supervision, but it will hardly give in on two strategic pillars: its ballistic missile program and support for its armed allies in the region, such as Hezbollah, pro-Iran militias in Syria and Iraq, and Palestinian groups.

“The definitive renunciation of the nuclear program, as Donald Trump demands, I do not see as possible,” holds. And it adds a key factor to understand international caution: the taqiyyaa doctrinal principle that allows intentions to be hidden or disguised based on the survival of the regime.

Therefore, Cymerman concludes, not optimistic about a lasting agreementunless Iran really sits “against the wall.” In this scenario, he warns, Israel always prepares for the worst possible scenario and assumes that the Iranian threat, although weakened, is still alive.