Why Israel Is Against Iran: Unpacking A Decades-Long Rivalry

Marilie Satterfield 22 Jun 2025

The complex and often volatile relationship between Israel and Iran is one of the most critical geopolitical flashpoints in the Middle East, with implications that ripple across the globe. Understanding why Israel is against Iran requires delving deep into decades of shifting alliances, existential threats, and strategic calculations. What began as a surprising alliance has transformed into a bitter, multifaceted rivalry, primarily driven by Iran's nuclear ambitions, its support for regional proxies, and its explicit anti-Israel rhetoric.

This enduring animosity isn't merely a clash of political interests; it's a profound ideological struggle that has led to a shadow war, characterized by covert operations, cyberattacks, and direct military strikes. From Israel's perspective, the threat posed by Iran is existential, making its proactive stance a matter of national survival. This article will explore the historical roots of this animosity, the core reasons for Israel's relentless opposition, and the broader regional and international dynamics at play.

Table of Contents

Historical Context: From Allies to Adversaries
- The Turning Point: 1979 Islamic Revolution
The Nuclear Threat: Israel's Primary Concern
- Accelerating Towards a Weapon?
Israel's Proactive Stance: Preemptive Strikes
- Targeting Nuclear Facilities and Military Leadership
Iran's Retaliation and Proxy Warfare
- Challenging Israel's Air Defenses
The Role of the United States: A Critical Ally
The "Wiped Off the Map" Rhetoric
Why Attack Now? Understanding the Timing of Strikes
The Enduring Confrontation: What Lies Ahead?

Historical Context: From Allies to Adversaries

To truly grasp why Israel is against Iran today, it's crucial to understand that their relationship wasn't always one of animosity. In a surprising twist of history, Israel and Iran were, in fact, allies until Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution. This alliance, forged out of shared strategic interests in the Middle East, saw Iran as one of the first states to recognize Israel after it was founded in 1948. Israel, in turn, regarded Iran as an ally against the Arab states, which were largely hostile to both nations. This period saw cooperation in various fields, including intelligence and military exchanges, reflecting a pragmatic alignment against common adversaries in the region.

However, this era of cooperation came to an abrupt end with the seismic shift of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The overthrow of the Shah and the establishment of the Islamic Republic fundamentally altered Iran's foreign policy orientation. The new revolutionary government, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, adopted a staunch anti-Western and anti-Israel stance, viewing the Jewish state as an illegitimate entity and a proxy for American imperialism. This ideological transformation laid the groundwork for the deep-seated animosity that defines their relationship today, marking a stark departure from their previous alliance and setting them on a collision course.

The Turning Point: 1979 Islamic Revolution

The Islamic Revolution in 1979 was the definitive turning point that irrevocably changed the trajectory of Israel-Iran relations. Prior to this, Israel and Iran had maintained clandestine but significant ties, built on a mutual distrust of Arab nationalism and a desire for regional stability. The Shah's Iran, a secular monarchy, saw Israel as a valuable partner in intelligence sharing and counter-terrorism efforts. However, the revolutionary fervor that swept Iran in 1979 dismantled this pragmatic alliance. The new regime, rooted in an Islamist ideology, immediately severed all diplomatic and economic ties with Israel, condemning it as the "Little Satan" and a cancerous tumor in the heart of the Islamic world.

This ideological shift was not merely rhetorical; it became a cornerstone of Iran's foreign policy. Since the rise of the Islamic Republic at the end of the 1970s, Iran has consistently supported groups and movements dedicated to Israel's destruction, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and various Palestinian factions. This active opposition, combined with Iran's pursuit of regional hegemony, transformed Israel's former ally into its fiercest enemy. The revolution cemented the deep-seated ideological conflict that continues to fuel the tensions and military actions between the two nations, making it the foundational event in understanding why Israel is against Iran.

The Nuclear Threat: Israel's Primary Concern

At the very core of why Israel is against Iran is the latter's relentless pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability. For Israel, a nation with a history of existential threats, the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran represents an unacceptable danger. Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have consistently stated that the offensive against Iran was carried out in order to cripple its nuclear program, which they assert is aimed at developing atomic weapons. This concern is not new; Israel has long been determined to prevent Iran, its fiercest enemy, from obtaining a nuclear weapon, viewing it as a direct threat to its survival.

The fear is multi-faceted: a nuclear Iran could embolden its proxies, trigger a regional arms race, or even launch a direct strike. Israel's position on this is that it has no choice; it believes that in the last few months, Iran was accelerating towards building a nuclear weapon, despite talks aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions. This perceived acceleration, coupled with Iran's history of obfuscation regarding its nuclear activities, has pushed Israel to adopt a highly aggressive posture. The belief that Iran is on the verge of a nuclear breakout capability underscores Israel's rationale for its preemptive and defensive actions, making the nuclear issue the paramount driver of their conflict.

Accelerating Towards a Weapon?

The intelligence assessments indicating Iran's acceleration towards building a nuclear weapon are a primary catalyst for Israel's actions. While Iran consistently maintains its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, Israel and many Western intelligence agencies remain highly skeptical, citing Iran's past covert activities and its refusal to fully cooperate with international inspectors. The "Data Kalimat" explicitly states that Israel believes "in the last few months Iran was accelerating towards building a nuclear weapon," and that "talks aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear" progress have been insufficient or have failed to yield the desired results.

This perceived acceleration significantly heightens Israel's sense of urgency. For Israel, a nuclear Iran is not merely a strategic challenge but an existential threat, given Iran's repeated calls for Israel's destruction. This belief in Iran's rapid progress towards weaponization justifies, in Israel's eyes, its extraordinary series of attacks on Iran, aiming at their nuclear facilities and top military officials. The urgency of this perceived threat explains why Israel is against Iran with such intensity and why it feels compelled to act decisively, even at the risk of escalating regional conflict, to prevent Iran from crossing the nuclear threshold.

Israel's Proactive Stance: Preemptive Strikes

Given its existential concerns regarding Iran's nuclear program and its regional ambitions, Israel has adopted a highly proactive and often preemptive military strategy. This approach is rooted in the belief that waiting for a threat to fully materialize is too risky. Consequently, Israel has carried out an extraordinary series of attacks on Iran, aiming at their nuclear facilities and top military officials. These operations are not random acts but carefully planned military endeavors designed to degrade Iran's capabilities and deter its nuclear progress.

For instance, "Israel on Friday initiated a significant military operation against Iran," with "explosions occurred in Tehran as Israel conducted strikes on Iranian nuclear and military installations." These actions are often justified by Israel's UN ambassador, who explains what prompted airstrikes against Iran, emphasizing that Israel's position is that it has no choice but to act. This proactive stance extends beyond nuclear targets to include military infrastructure and leadership, reflecting a comprehensive strategy to counter what Israel perceives as an overarching threat. The consistent pattern of these strikes underscores Israel's determination to unilaterally defend its security interests, highlighting a key aspect of why Israel is against Iran in such an aggressive manner.

Targeting Nuclear Facilities and Military Leadership

The precision and nature of Israel's strikes against Iran reveal a clear strategic objective: to dismantle Iran's nuclear infrastructure and neutralize its military leadership capable of advancing the program or orchestrating attacks against Israel. "Israel launched strike against Iran Friday morning, targeting the heart of Iran's nuclear sites and military leaders, prompting retaliation from Iran." This direct targeting strategy is not just about slowing down Iran's nuclear progress; it's about crippling it. Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have explicitly stated that these offensives are carried out "in order to cripple its nuclear program."

Beyond nuclear facilities, the targeting of top military officials underscores Israel's intent to disrupt the command and control structures that support Iran's hostile activities. This dual approach aims to set back Iran's capabilities significantly, making it harder for them to develop weapons or coordinate attacks through their proxies. Such operations are often shrouded in secrecy, but their impact is undeniable, leading to retaliatory actions from Iran and escalating the shadow war. The consistent focus on these critical targets illustrates Israel's unwavering commitment to preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power and its willingness to take decisive action, which is central to understanding why Israel is against Iran so fiercely.

Iran's Retaliation and Proxy Warfare

The intense pressure exerted by Israel's preemptive strikes inevitably prompts retaliation from Iran, creating a dangerous cycle of escalation. Iran, despite the challenges facing it at the moment, will, I believe, have to respond in a way that goes beyond its previous attacks on Israel. This response often comes in various forms, including direct missile or drone attacks, as evidenced by "reports of drone attacks against Israel on 13 June," and through its extensive network of regional proxies. Iran and its proxies have long been a significant concern for Israel, as they enable Tehran to project power and threaten Israeli interests without direct conventional military engagement.

These proxies, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and various militias in Syria and Iraq, receive significant financial, military, and logistical support from Iran. They act as an extension of Iran's foreign policy, capable of launching missile barrages, conducting cross-border raids, and engaging in asymmetric warfare. While Israel's Iron Dome is being severely tested by Iran’s missile barrages, it has been able to lean on its principal ally, the United States, to provide assistance. This proxy warfare adds another layer of complexity to the conflict, making it a multi-front engagement that extends far beyond the direct borders of Israel and Iran, further cementing why Israel is against Iran's regional influence.

Challenging Israel's Air Defenses

Iran's retaliatory actions, whether direct or through proxies, frequently involve attempts to penetrate Israel's sophisticated air defenses. As Iran learned in those attacks, penetrating Israel’s substantial air defenses is a challenge. Israel's multi-layered air defense system, most notably the Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow systems, is designed to intercept a wide range of threats, from short-range rockets to long-range ballistic missiles. However, the sheer volume and increasing sophistication of Iran's missile barrages and drone attacks continuously test these defenses.

The "2024 assaults" mentioned in the data highlight the ongoing attempts by Iran and its allies to overwhelm Israel's defensive capabilities. While the Iron Dome has proven highly effective in intercepting threats, each barrage represents a significant test of its capacity and resilience. The need to maintain and upgrade these defenses is a constant drain on Israeli resources, and it underscores the continuous nature of the threat. This ongoing challenge to its national security infrastructure is a key reason why Israel is against Iran's military buildup and its aggressive posture, as it directly translates into tangible threats on Israeli soil.

The Role of the United States: A Critical Ally

The relationship between Israel and Iran is profoundly shaped by the indispensable role of the United States. For Israel, America is its principal ally, providing crucial military, economic, and diplomatic support. This alliance is particularly vital in the context of the conflict with Iran. "Israel’s Iron Dome is being severely tested by Iran’s missile barrages, but it has been able to lean on its principal ally, the United States, to provide assistance." This assistance goes beyond just defensive systems; it includes intelligence sharing, strategic coordination, and diplomatic backing on the international stage.

The United States' involvement also adds another dimension to the conflict, with some analysts noting that "Israel’s war against Iran is America’s war, too." While the U.S. often seeks to de-escalate tensions and has reportedly "warned Israel against going that far" in certain military actions, it also recognizes the strategic importance of containing Iran. Decisive American action against Iran is not just about containing Tehran; it is also about reaffirming Washington’s position and strategic credibility globally. Furthermore, American action alongside Israel would immediately reinforce critical U.S. interests in the region. This complex dynamic means that U.S. policy towards Iran directly impacts Israel's strategic calculus and its ability to confront what it perceives as an existential threat, making the U.S. a central player in why Israel is against Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional influence.

The "Wiped Off the Map" Rhetoric

One of the most provocative and frequently cited reasons why Israel is against Iran is the explicit and often genocidal rhetoric emanating from Tehran. This rhetoric goes beyond mere political disagreement, directly threatening Israel's existence. A prime example is the infamous statement made by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, then Iran’s new conservative president, in October 2005, when he was quoted as saying that Israel should be "wiped off the map." Such statements are not isolated incidents; the verbal attacks against Israel have not abated, with various Iranian officials and state media consistently denying Israel's right to exist and calling for its destruction.

For Israel, these pronouncements are not just inflammatory words; they are seen as a clear articulation of Iran's ultimate goal. When coupled with Iran's nuclear program and its support for armed proxies, this rhetoric transforms into a tangible threat. It reinforces Israel's belief that Iran poses an existential danger that must be countered with all available means. This ideological antagonism, rooted in a rejection of Israel's sovereignty, fuels Israel's determination to prevent Iran from acquiring the means to carry out such a threat, making the "wiped off the map" declaration a constant reminder of the stakes involved in their bitter rivalry.

Why Attack Now? Understanding the Timing of Strikes

The question of "Why might Israel attack now?" or "Why did Israel attack Iran now?" is frequently asked, particularly when significant military operations occur. The timing of Israel's strikes against Iran is rarely arbitrary; it's typically a calculated decision influenced by a confluence of factors, often related to perceived immediate threats or strategic opportunities. One primary driver, as repeatedly emphasized, is the belief that Iran is "accelerating towards building a nuclear weapon." When intelligence suggests a critical threshold is about to be crossed, or that Iran is making significant advancements in its enrichment capabilities or missile technology, Israel feels compelled to act decisively.

Another factor could be a response to specific Iranian actions or provocations, such as "reports of drone attacks against Israel on 13 June," or the deployment of advanced weaponry to proxies. Furthermore, internal political considerations in both Israel and Iran, as well as the broader regional and international geopolitical landscape, can influence the timing. The "operation is expected to last 'weeks, not days'," suggesting a sustained effort rather than a one-off strike, indicating a deeper strategic objective perhaps aimed at setting back Iran's capabilities for an extended period. The complex interplay of intelligence assessments, retaliatory cycles, and strategic imperatives dictates why Israel is against Iran with such urgency at specific junctures.

The Enduring Confrontation: What Lies Ahead?

The confrontation between Israel and Iran is deeply entrenched, characterized by decades of ideological animosity, strategic competition, and a dangerous shadow war. The core reasons why Israel is against Iran – primarily Iran's nuclear ambitions, its destabilizing regional activities through proxies, and its explicit calls for Israel's destruction – show no signs of abating. The cycle of Israeli preemptive strikes, such as those targeting "Iranian nuclear and military installations," and Iran's inevitable "retaliation," often through missile and drone attacks, has become a perilous pattern. This dynamic ensures that the region remains on edge, with the constant threat of wider escalation.

Looking ahead, the trajectory of this conflict will largely depend on several critical variables. These include the progress of Iran's nuclear program, the effectiveness of international diplomacy (or lack thereof), the extent of U.S. support for Israel, and the internal stability of both nations. While the United States has at times "warned Israel against going that far," its fundamental support for Israel's security remains steadfast. The "verbal attacks against Israel have not abated," indicating that the ideological chasm remains wide. Unless there is a fundamental shift in Iran's strategic objectives or a breakthrough in international efforts to curb its nuclear program and regional influence, the enduring confrontation between Israel and Iran is set to continue, defining the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East for the foreseeable future.

Conclusion

The deep-seated animosity between Israel and Iran is a complex tapestry woven from historical shifts, existential fears, and ideological clashes. What began as a strategic alliance transformed into a bitter rivalry following Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, with the new regime adopting an aggressively anti-Israel stance. At the heart of why Israel is against Iran lies the paramount concern over Iran's nuclear program, which Israel views as an existential threat that must be prevented at all costs. This fear drives Israel's proactive military strategy, involving preemptive strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities and military leadership, often prompting retaliation from Tehran and its network of regional proxies.

The "wiped off the map" rhetoric from Iranian officials further solidifies Israel's perception of an unwavering threat, reinforcing its determination to act decisively. The critical role of the United States as Israel's principal ally provides crucial support, yet also intertwines the conflict with broader global strategic interests. Understanding these multifaceted dimensions is key to comprehending one of the world's most volatile geopolitical rivalries. We hope this article has shed light on the intricate reasons behind this enduring confrontation. What are your thoughts on the future of Israel-Iran relations? Share your insights in the comments below, or explore our other articles on Middle Eastern geopolitics for more in-depth analysis.

Why you should start with why

Why Text Question · Free image on Pixabay

UTILITY COMPANIES MAKE MISTAKES - WHY? - Pacific Utility Auditing

Redefining Progress With Purpose