Israel's Army Chief Says No, Two Days Before the Vote

Israel's Channel 12 and Channel 13 reported on Sunday 25 October that Eyal Zamir, the chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, had refused Benjamin Netanyahu's demand for a strike on Iran before Tuesday's election, and would not proceed without a comprehensive security assessment, a legal clarification and a signed political authorization.¹ Axios reported the same day that Netanyahu had asked Donald Trump for a stronger endorsement ahead of the election and had suggested the words he might use.² Asked about Iran that day, the president put the choice to himself out loud: "do I make a deal with them or do I finish them off?" There would be no attack that day, he added.³ Behind both men sat the New York Times account of detailed American and Israeli plans for another round of strikes that could reach Iran's energy infrastructure, and of an Iranian response that could widen to American personnel and diplomatic facilities.⁴ A general's refusal two days before a vote raises one question: does it take the third round off the table, or only move the decision from a prime minister facing one election to a president facing another on Tuesday 3 November?

Larry Johnson read the demand itself as the story. Netanyahu has been warning that Iran is on the verge of a bomb, in Johnson's count, for 34 years,⁵ and the point of restarting the war now has nothing to do with centrifuges: "his entire reason for wanting to start this war up is to create a crisis situation where he can justify calling off the election."⁶ Polls relayed on Mario Nawfal's broadcast had Netanyahu's chance of winning down from 32 to 27 percent in a week while Gadi Eisenkot's rose from 45 to 52.⁷ Zamir's three conditions, an assessment, a legal opinion and a signature, are the institutional form of a refusal to be the instrument of that.

Alan Eyre, who worked the Iran file at the State Department, did not think the refusal changes the destination. "Iran is going to be attacked, right? So, it's just a question of timing,"⁸ he said, and the two dates on offer were the Israeli election and the American midterms. What has changed, in his account, is the one variable he used to be able to read. "I no longer feel confident that I can model President Trump's decisionmaking."⁹ Nor does he think the strike, whenever it comes, will do what its authors promise: "We did 40 days of carpet bombing. It didn't get anywhere. It won't get anywhere."¹⁰

“The bigger the Trump loss in legitimate voting, the bigger the Trump incentive to create even bigger escalation against Iran.”

Robert Pape supplied the mechanism that connects the two elections. "The bigger the Trump loss in legitimate voting, the bigger the Trump incentive to create even bigger escalation against Iran,"¹¹ he said, and he spelled out what a bigger escalation means: "if it's a bigger loss, then it's in his incentive to wreck Iran's, say, oil, energy, electric power infrastructure, knowing Iran will do all the devastation that it's claiming it will do."¹² That devastation, in Pape's reading, reaches American embassies and ambassadors.¹³ His case against expecting the blockade to produce a deal instead is six months old: "Since April 12th, which is now 6 months, all right, what's happened? Iran has become more aggressive."¹⁴

Daniel Davis closed the loophole that a Netanyahu defeat might seem to open. Israeli government formation takes weeks or months, so whoever wins on Tuesday, "by the time the US midterm elections come, he's going to definitely be the prime minister then."¹⁵ Davis also doubts the war aim Netanyahu has set for himself. He read the prime minister's own pledge, "Together with President Trump, I will complete the mission and we will bring down the regime in Iran," and answered it: "He's not going to do that, folks. He doesn't have the power."¹⁶ His counsel to Washington was to stop lending him the power: "That's why it's vital that President Trump just walks away from this right now."¹⁷ JD Vance's refusal on Fox and Friends to endorse Netanyahu, which Davis also noted, suggests the stronger endorsement sought through Axios is not yet on offer.¹⁸

Mohammad Marandi treated the argument over dates as a Western preoccupation. "I believe that we will have war. It could happen before or after the Netanyahu election. It could happen before or after the midterms in the United States."¹⁹ Iran's own planning does not wait for the signature Zamir wants: "Iran will not rule out a preemptive strike because at the end of the day it's not really preemptive. We are at war."²⁰ And the target list he described is the one the Times attributed to Iranian retaliation: "The Iranians believe that any economic target in any way or form linked to the United States in the region is legitimate."²¹

Johnson expects the next round, when it comes, to be smaller than the first, "it's not going to be bigger than what happened during the first 40 days. It'll be smaller now,"²² with an Iranian reply more intense than before. He also sees the quieter track still running alongside the war planning: "I think the most likely is there will be a deal cut between Qatar and Iran at a minimum."²³ His floor for the region does not depend on which track wins: "the US domination in the Persian Gulf is over. All right? It's not coming back."²⁴

Johnson, Eyre, Pape, Davis and Marandi do not read Zamir's refusal as the end of anything. They read it as a transfer. The conditions he set, an assessment, a legal basis and a signature, are those of a military that has stopped assuming the war is Israel's alone to start, and the signature it is really waiting for is American. The plan the Times describes is a joint one, its targets include the Gulf energy that Iran has promised to answer in kind, and the bill, from Brent at $117 before a single new strike to embassy families already flown out of the Gulf, is paid in Washington. Zamir can withhold his own signature; he cannot withhold Trump's. Israel votes on Tuesday 27 October with its general refusing and the man who demanded the strike still able, by Davis's reckoning, to ask for it again from the same office after the American vote.

Is the strike coming, and when?

MC

Mark Cancian, Mario Nawfal

Puts a restarted US air campaign at two in three, with Israel staying out: "it's absolutely a telltale sign that the administration is getting ready to restart the air campaign."

Stanislav Krapivnik, Dialogue Works

Expects another round, but not a long one: "On a long-term attrition warfare, they can't win against Iran, especially when you got Russia from day one backing Iran, and you got China now backing Iran."

Ray McGovern, Dialogue Works

Puts about 90 percent on Netanyahu striking the West Bank before the election, and for Washington, "the US for the first time in many years is not winning. It's not even a draw."

John Mearsheimer, John Mearsheimer

Whatever the date, the damage is done: "This war has incentivized Iranian leaders to acquire nuclear weapons."

Lula by three and a half points, Langley's war in Kiev, and 500 bases told to stand alone

Brazil kept Lula, narrowly. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva won Sunday 25 October's runoff over Flavio Bolsonaro by about 51.7 to 48.2 percent, on the electoral court figures cited on Neutrality Studies. Warwick Powell took the result as relief rather than momentum: "it's a good win for multipolarity this Brazilian outcome, but it really just reminds everybody just how vulnerable and fragile multipolarity is at the moment around the world."²⁵ David Wolf, talking to Mario Nawfal, measured the market's verdict in the currency, with the real taking "roughly a 10% devaluation."²⁶

The Atlantic names the CIA's war. Alexander Mercouris spent part of Sunday on The Atlantic's long account of the CIA's role in the Ukraine war and on Elon Musk's posts about Starlink, and drew one conclusion from both: "If the United States were to take a decision to end the war tomorrow, the war would end."²⁷

Ninety days alone. Fox News reported on Sunday 25 October, citing documents, that every one of roughly 500 continental US military installations must be able to run essential operations on its own for at least 90 days under Pete Hegseth's "Fortress America" initiative.²⁸ Nate of Canadian Prepper read the number backwards, from the requirement to the scenario that would call for it: "Understand that 90 days for a military base to be functioning by itself suggests a catastrophic failure of the power grid."²⁸ Larry Johnson called the plan unbudgeted and unrealistic, and said the United States cannot convert civilian factories the way it did in 1940 and 1941.²⁹

Sources

1. Channel 12 and Channel 13, as read on Mario Nawfal · IDF chief of staff Eyal Zamir refused Netanyahu's push for a strike on Iran before Tuesday's election without a security assessment, legal clarification and signed political authorization · watch ▶
2. Axios, as read on Mario Nawfal · Netanyahu asked Trump for a stronger endorsement and suggested the wording Trump should use · watch ▶
3. Donald Trump, as read on Dialogue Works · "Do I make a deal with them or do I finish them off?"; no attack on Iran on Sunday · watch ▶
4. New York Times, as read on Tom Switzer · Detailed US-Israeli plans for another round of strikes that could target energy infrastructure; Iran could expand retaliation to US personnel and diplomatic facilities · watch ▶
5. Larry Johnson, Dialogue Works · Netanyahu has been warning of an imminent Iranian bomb for 34 years · watch ▶ 2:02
6. Larry Johnson, Dialogue Works · Netanyahu wants to restart the war to create a crisis that justifies calling off the election · watch ▶ 2:30
7. Mario Nawfal, Mario Nawfal · Netanyahu's odds of winning fell from 32 to 27 percent in a week while Gadi Eisenkot rose from 45 to 52 percent · watch ▶
8. Alan Eyre, Mario Nawfal · Iran is going to be attacked; the only open question is timing · watch ▶ 5:46
9. Alan Eyre, Mario Nawfal · He no longer feels confident he can model Trump's decision-making · watch ▶ 13:27
10. Alan Eyre, Mario Nawfal · Forty days of carpet bombing got nowhere and will get nowhere · watch ▶ 22:37
11. Robert Pape, Tom Switzer · The bigger Trump's midterm loss, the bigger his incentive to escalate against Iran · watch ▶ 12:39
12. Robert Pape, Tom Switzer · A large loss gives Trump the incentive to wreck Iran's oil, energy and electric power infrastructure · watch ▶ 13:13
13. Robert Pape, Tom Switzer · Iran will retaliate against US embassies and ambassadors if attacked again · watch ▶ 7:22
14. Robert Pape, Tom Switzer · Six months of blockade since 12 April have made Iran more aggressive, not compliant · watch ▶ 25:56
15. Daniel Davis, Daniel Davis / Deep Dive · Netanyahu will still be prime minister when the US midterms arrive, whatever Tuesday's result · watch ▶ 24:06
16. Daniel Davis, Daniel Davis / Deep Dive · Netanyahu lacks the power to bring down the Iranian regime · watch ▶ 24:16
17. Daniel Davis, Daniel Davis / Deep Dive · It is vital that Trump walks away from the Iran war now · watch ▶ 45:05
18. Fox and Friends, as read on Daniel Davis / Deep Dive · JD Vance declined to endorse Netanyahu for the Israeli election · watch ▶
19. Mohammad Marandi, Glenn Diesen · War will come, before or after the Israeli election, before or after the US midterms · watch ▶ 1:29
20. Mohammad Marandi, Glenn Diesen · Iran will not rule out a preemptive strike because it considers itself already at war · watch ▶ 3:14
21. Mohammad Marandi, Glenn Diesen · Any economic target in the region linked to the United States is legitimate in Iranian eyes · watch ▶ 5:19
22. Larry Johnson, Dialogue Works · Renewed strikes will be smaller than the first 40 days, with a more intense Iranian reply · watch ▶ 19:24
23. Larry Johnson, Dialogue Works · The most likely outcome is a deal between Qatar and Iran at a minimum · watch ▶ 28:04
24. Larry Johnson, Dialogue Works · US domination of the Persian Gulf is over and is not coming back · watch ▶ 32:05
25. Warwick Powell, Neutrality Studies · Lula's win is good for multipolarity but shows how fragile multipolarity is · watch ▶ 43:27
26. David Wolf, Mario Nawfal · The real took roughly a 10 percent devaluation · watch ▶ 15:10
27. Alexander Mercouris, Alexander Mercouris · If Washington decided to end the Ukraine war tomorrow, the war would end · watch ▶ 51:41
28. Nate of Canadian Prepper, Canadian Prepper · Fox News reports 500 US bases must run alone for 90 days; that requirement implies a catastrophic grid failure · watch ▶ 2:13
29. Larry Johnson, Dialogue Works · The Pentagon's base-resilience plan is unbudgeted and unrealistic; the US cannot convert civilian factories as in 1940 and 1941 · watch ▶

By Ruins Report, a daily synthesis of what our tracked analysts said, not original reporting. Every numbered claim is sourced, dated, and timestamped above.