Serious question: What is the red line that Iran should not cross at this time?

In a globalized and highly interconnected world, today’s conflicts of war are fought not only on the battlefield, but in the minds of public opinion (which can become irrelevant in making the necessary decisions to preserve the existence of a nation).

Today the Jews have a state willing to activate the “Samson Option” (a deterrence strategy using nuclear weapons named in memory of the character Samson in the book of Judges, whom the Philistines cut off his mane from where his power came from, eviscerated both eyes and took prisoner). Just as Samson asked God for strength one last time to bring down the pillars that supported the foundations of the Temple of Dagon in Gaza where 3000 people died (including all the rulers of the Philistines and Samson himself), the State of Israel is prepared to use nuclear weapons in order to preserve its existence in case it is threatened, with the difference that Israel is not willing to die like Samson once “the pillars are brought down”.

In that particular case, the red line is well established by Israel for its enemies and for public opinion in general. If Israel’s existence is seriously threatened in any way, whether by conventional or non-conventional (nuclear, biological or chemical) means of warfare, Israel will use as a last resort its entire nuclear arsenal against its enemies if necessary. Although Israel theoretically has some 90 nuclear warheads, it is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and refuses to confirm or deny possession of nuclear weapons. Thus, it is not known how destructive Israel’s nuclear weapons are, or whether its nuclear arsenal is even more extensive than believed.

However, in the case of a preemptive strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, it is unknown what red line(s) set by the State of Israel that Iran must cross for Israel to attempt to destroy them.

On the other hand, how convenient would it be for Israel’s security to openly communicate those red lines to its enemies and public opinion as a warning whose main purpose would be to prevent a new escalation in the region?  That is a question that only Israel’s government and senior military commanders can answer.

But would international public opinion about Israel change when the time comes to damage Iran’s nuclear program, even if Iran crosses a red line and Israel clearly establishes it beforehand? This would likely depend on the precision of the attack and its effectiveness in preventing the deaths of Iranian civilians due to radioactive contamination or damage to the region’s environment.

Israel has demonstrated in recent months a high degree of precision in its air strikes. If it had wanted to strike those nuclear facilities, it would have already done so. What is unknown is how effective such an attack would be in destroying these nuclear facilities, some of which are deep underground, as is the case at Natanz nuclear facility.

However, this action could produce an even greater escalation if Iran decides to openly declare war against Israel or countries allied with Iran decide to join the conflict. As we already know, Israel will spare no resources when it comes to defending its territory from a major defeat by its enemies.

Just like in a chess board, both players already have preset opening moves that they have decided to use before the game begins to develop unpredictably at both ends, with the difference that Israel plays with the Queen, while Iran and the rest of the countries in the Middle East do not.

In any case, the latest move on the board was made by Israel at the end of October this year through a surprise airstrike against Iranian military targets. Now the whole world is waiting for the next step that Iran will take in the hope that it will not cross any of those red lines that only Israel knows exactly at the moment. This could take the conflict to a dangerous geopolitical terrain where “the pillars” of the Middle East begin to stagger.