For Israel, however, a return to the negotiating table represents the most problematic outcome.By Yaakov Lappin, JNSAs the United States and Iran remain locked in low-grade conflict in the Persian Gulf, a conflict that has left Israel out so far, an IDF source has told JNS that the Israeli military is “preparing for all scenarios.”The military must be prepared for the possibility of rapidly being involved in the conflict even if this scenario does not currently seem very likely.Brig. Gen. (res.) Professor Jacob Nagel, the former head of Israel’s National Security Council and a senior fellow at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, outlined the structural flaws in the June 17 Islamabad Agreement between Tehran and Washington that paved the way for the current escalation.“Iran and the United States entered a state of rolling confrontation and exchange of blows, which was indeed expected, but began earlier than expected,” Nagel said.The diplomatic framework that temporarily paused hostilities was fundamentally broken from its inception, he argued, stating, “The MoU that was signed between the U.S. and Iran is fundamentally flawed and mainly reflected the strong desire of the U.S. to reach an agreement at almost any cost. This led to a ‘hollow and perforated’ agreement, which each side interprets as it wishes,” Nagel stated.This divergence in interpretation centered almost entirely on the critical maritime corridor of the Persian Gulf.“Everything in this agreement was built so that each side would receive the only issue that interested it: the U.S., the opening of the Strait of Hormuz; and Iran, the flow of billions and the release of some of the sanctions and mainly the ability to export oil,” Nagel argued.In practice, however, Tehran’s operational behavior quickly collided with Washington’s expectations.Iran interpreted the concept of ‘opening the Strait of Hormuz’ as permission to control all shipping that passes through the straits, “even if at this stage without payment,” Nagel stated.“Iran understood very quickly that the US does not intend for this and is opening a transition channel on the Omani side on the one hand, and it does not agree to Iranian control over the passage on the other. To this understanding was added the recognition that the flow of billions on which it built is not happening at the rate it thought, for many reasons, and this led it to attack ships that passed adjacent to Oman without Iranian coordination, a fact that the US could not accept,” he added.“All of this led to mutual attacks, even though neither side truly wants to deteriorate into full-scale warfare.” Nagel assessed.He added that developments on Israel’s northern border must also be factored in, noting that the diplomatic arrangements there (the MoU between Israel, Lebanon, and the United States), led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, “completely contradict the subordination of the situation in Lebanon to the [Iranian-American] MoU and transfer the responsibility and control to Israel and Lebanon, which the extremists in Iran cannot accept.”“In contrast to many statements, Israel is not ‘praying’ in my opinion, neither for a full renewal of fighting nor for an Israeli entry into the campaign, but will not ‘weep bitter tears’ if it happens, and this is without entering into considerations of timing and elections in Israel and the U.S.,” Nagel stated.“The IDF is ready and alert for the entire range of scenarios in defense and offense. There is no doubt that whoever needs to is refreshing the target bank in Iran, including targets that were not attacked the previous time for various reasons, and targets that the Iranians began to rehabilitate, both in the nuclear fielreasons andes, and in government assets and personalities that still remained at all levels and roles in the nuclear program, the government, the Revolutionary Guards, and the Basij,” he assessed.“In addition, I assume that targets affecting the Iranian economy and the will of the people to go out against the regime will also be examined,” he said, listing banking, energy, petrochemicals, heavy industry, water, desalination, and others as potential targeted sectors.“The rolling confrontation and the walking on the brink between Washington and Tehran affect Israel, but not, as several commentators express, in a strategic manner,” he added.Nagel outlined three distinct future scenarios: A continuation of the current exchange of blows over several weeks, at least until the American midterms, without entering into full-scale war, even if the American blockade returns, or is “even increased, as it should be, returns or.Alternatively, the crisis could escalate into a wider regional conflict, with or without Israel, which would enter “probably only if the United States asks it to do so, or if Iran makes the mistake of attacking Israel, or if a unique opportunity for an extraordinary achievement is identified in Israel.”Finally, diplomatic channels could assert themselves once more.“A joint decision, with the encouragement of mediators and negotiation teams from both sides, to stop the blows and return to the discussion room,” Nagel stated.For Israel, however, a return to the negotiating table represents the most problematic outcome.“In my humble opinion, any scenario in which the parties enter the discussion room again is worse for Israel than all other scenarios, because nothing good can come out of a negotiation room where Iranians are present, when the maximum they are willing to give is very far from the minimum the US is willing to accept, and not only on the nuclear issue,” he added.Nagel emphasized that current American diplomatic redlines fall short of Israel’s core strategic requirements, particularly when compared to previous presidential declarations.“This is without referring to what Israel would have liked to receive from such a negotiation, for example, Trump’s statements just a few weeks ago about the full dismantling of the nuclear program, including all enrichment sites; the destruction of centrifuges and nuclear materials at all levels of enrichment; and the dismantling of the capability to produce anew. All of these are currently not on the table at all, even from the American side, and therefore a return to negotiations is not good for Israel,” he concluded.The post ‘IDF preparing for all scenarios’ appeared first on World Israel News.