US will blame Israel if large-scale attacks against Iran fail, former defense official warns

Former senior defense official Avner Vilan said on Monday that Washington and Tehran remain caught between an agreement and full-scale war, while renewed fighting could intensify criticism of Israel.Follow us on GoogleA person holds a placard representing a US flag, with an image of Iran's new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei on a billboard in the background, on the day of a ceremony marking 40 days since Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed, in Tehran, Iran, April 9, 2026.(photo credit: MAJID ASGARIPOUR/WANA (WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY) VIA REUTERS)By103FMJULY 27, 2026 13:01Israel would be blamed for the failure of another large-scale attack against Iran if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tries to persuade US President Donald Trump to renew the strikes during his upcoming visit, former senior defense official and Iranian nuclear expert Avner Vilan told 103FM on Monday.“If he succeeds in persuading Trump to attack again, and the attack succeeds, I take my hat off to him,” Vilan said. “But if it does not succeed, the US will blame us even more for dragging it into a war that damaged its international standing and drove up fuel prices.”Speaking with Ilil Shahar and Amichai Attali, Vilan explained that the US and Iran are locked in a fragile status quo between a new agreement and a return to full-scale war, ahead of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s expected meeting with US President Donald Trump in Washington.He added that neither side was satisfied with the current situation, but neither was in a hurry to change it.“Since the end of Operation Roaring Lion, the situation has been neither here nor there, a kind of status quo involving a new balance of neither peace nor war. It may be a better situation for all the players than the alternatives. We have essentially been in the same situation since the end of March,” Vilan said.US forces operating in the Strait of Hormuz, July 17, 2026. (credit: Screenshot/X/@PeteHegseth)The other options on the table, he said, were considerably more complex and dangerous. “The alternatives are an agreement or high-intensity war,” the former senior official pointed out.Iranian concessions and the risks of renewed fightingAt this stage, however, Vilan assessed that Iran was not prepared to pay the price required under an agreement.“Iran does not want to reach an agreement. It is not prepared to relinquish what it achieved in Hormuz, and therefore it would prefer war to going backward,” he said. “Of course, it does not want to initiate a high-intensity war, and it would prefer to buy time until the midterm elections or until there is a new president in the United States.”The US administration’s room to maneuver has also narrowed. Vilan argued that Washington had already gone a significant distance in its efforts to reach an understanding and now expected concessions from Tehran.“The US is currently in a difficult position,” Vilan said. “The US has reached the limit of the concessions it can make in an initial agreement. At this point, an agreement would have to include significant Iranian concessions, and that will not happen.”At the same time, he did not view renewed strikes as a simple solution.“A return to fighting would send oil prices soaring, and there is a larger question here: What would they gain from fighting? Can they change the Iranian position?”Shortage of interceptor missiles playing a role in US' strategyThe New York Times reported over the weekend that one of the considerations that prevented the US from launching a major attack on Iran was a shortage of interceptor missiles.Vilan assessed that the report likely had some basis, but said the central question was not only military capability, but also the possible strategic outcome.“I assume there is some truth to the report, and a shortage of interceptors is another consideration,” he said.However, he stressed: “If we knew there was a plan that would bring about regime change in Iran and that afterward we would be friends forever and ever, perhaps I would support such a move even without interceptors.”Follow us on Google