Israel has defended its targeted strikes on senior Iranian officials, including the killing of security chief Ali Larijani, and signalled that military operations will continue, with its envoy to India saying there will be no de-escalation until there is a “change” in Iran.
In an exclusive interview with India Today’s consulting editor Rajdeep Sardesai, Israel’s Ambassador to India Reuven Azhar said the strikes that also reportedly killed senior commander Gholamreza Soleimani were part of a sustained campaign to weaken Iran’s military capabilities.
Azhar said the strikes reflected Israel’s growing operational reach. “Our penetration into Iran gets only deeper,” he said, adding that sustained attacks had “seriously” undermined the regime’s capabilities. He claimed that Iran’s ability to damage Israel and destabilise the region had already been reduced by “almost 80 per cent”.
‘NO DE-ESCALATION WITHOUT CHANGE’
Despite mounting international concern, the Israeli envoy ruled out any immediate pause in hostilities. “We won’t de-escalate until there is a change in Iran,” he said, indicating that Israel is pursuing long-term strategic outcomes rather than a limited military objective.
He argued that diplomatic efforts had repeatedly failed over decades, accusing Tehran of “playing for time” while expanding its nuclear and missile programmes. According to Azhar, Iran had refused to negotiate on key demands, including curbing ballistic missiles, halting support for proxies, and ending uranium enrichment.
DEFINING ‘WINNING THE WAR’
Azhar laid out Israel’s objectives in clear terms: preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, limiting its ballistic missile arsenal, and dismantling its network of regional proxies.
He claimed Israeli and allied intelligence indicated Iran was moving critical parts of its nuclear and missile infrastructure deep underground, potentially placing them beyond the reach of future strikes. That, he said, made military action urgent.
“The threat was imminent,” he said, adding that Israel could not afford to wait while Iran strengthened what he described as its ability to “annihilate” Israel.
REGIME CHANGE OR POLICY SHIFT
While stopping short of explicitly calling for regime change, Azhar said multiple outcomes remained possible. “The endgame could be either the substantial debilitation of this regime, a change in its policy, or a regime change,” he said.
He stressed that any political transformation would ultimately be decided by the Iranian people, but claimed there were visible “cracks” within the system, including what he described as desertions and declining morale within security forces.
‘JOINT EFFORT’ WITH THE UNITED STATES
Rejecting suggestions that Israel was acting unilaterally or pushing Washington into conflict, Azhar described the campaign as a coordinated effort. “No country, especially not the United States, acts on behalf of another,” he said, calling it a “joint operation” driven by shared interests.
He added that the decision to strike had broad political backing within Israel, including from opposition parties, based on intelligence inputs.
CIVILIAN CASUALTIES AND JUSTIFICATION
Addressing criticism over civilian deaths, including reports of casualties in Iran and neighbouring countries, Azhar maintained that Israel targets only military infrastructure.
“It is not our policy to target civilians,” he said, while acknowledging that “tragic incidents” can occur during conflict.
He also defended Israel’s position on targeting Iran’s leadership, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, alleging that Tehran had orchestrated attacks against Israel for decades through proxy groups across the region.
REGIONAL DYNAMICS AND INDIA’S STANCE
Azhar suggested that while many Arab states have not publicly backed Israel, they share deep concerns about Iran’s actions and privately recognise the threat posed by Tehran.
On India’s position, he said New Delhi would act in its own national interest and that Israel respected its independent approach, even as both countries maintain close ties.
He also clarified that Israel had no prior operational plan to strike Iran during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit, saying the opportunity for the current offensive emerged only after the visit concluded.
A LONG WAR AHEAD?
While Israeli officials have indicated readiness for a prolonged conflict, Azhar said the duration of the war would depend on how events unfold on the ground and whether Iran alters its course. “I don’t think we are planning for a perpetual war,” he said, but added that Israel would continue until it achieves its core objectives.
