On June 7, 1981, Israeli F-16s flew across hostile airspace and destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor. Two days later, Prime Minister Menachem Begin addressed the world: “If we stood by idly, two, three years, at the most four years, and Saddam Hussein would have produced his three, four, five bombs then, this country and this people would have been lost, after the Holocaust,” he warned. “Another holocaust would have happened in the history of the Jewish people. Never again, never again!”
That act of anticipatory self-defense became the foundation of what came to be known as the Begin Doctrine: a strategic principle declaring that Israel would not allow hostile regimes to obtain nuclear weapons. It was reaffirmed in 2007, when prime minister Ehud Olmert ordered the destruction of Syria’s clandestine reactor after the US refused to act. Olmert reportedly told president George W. Bush, “If you don’t act against the reactor, we will.”
Today, Israel faces a similar moment. According to a Jerusalem Post report published on April 17, 2025, Jerusalem seriously considered attacking Iran’s nuclear program multiple times since October 2024, after the Islamic Republic launched more than 200 ballistic missiles at Israel. Following a successful Shaldag commando raid on a Syrian underground facility and a deep Israel Air Force strike in Iran in April 2024, defense officials reportedly concluded that a strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure is now “doable with very high confidence.”
This is not how the Begin Doctrine was meant to work.
According to Maj.-Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin, who flew on the Osirak mission and later headed IDF Military Intelligence, “Israel’s attacks against the nuclear reactors under construction in Iraq and in Syria achieved total destruction of the reactors, and without casualties.” Writing in an INSS paper in 2018, Yadlin argued that in both 1981 and 2007, the destruction of these facilities delayed the nuclear ambitions of Iraq and Syria by years – far more than what could have been achieved by sanctions or diplomatic pressure.
But Yadlin also warned that Iran presents a more complex challenge. Its program is dispersed, buried deep underground, and protected by hardened defenses. Still, the principle remains: Israel cannot depend on others to act in its place.
In Begin’s words from 1981: “We shall not allow any enemy to develop weapons of mass destruction turned against us.”
The Post report also revealed that some Israeli officials hoped to strike Iran while US CENTCOM Commander Gen. Michael Kurilla was still in office, recognizing his operational rapport with Israel. But Kurilla is stepping down. President Donald Trump, though previously encouraging Israeli military action, has since favored diplomacy, even sending Kurilla to tell Israel to stand down – for now.
And yet, some officials believe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has grown too dependent on US approval. Others say Israel can and should act alone – particularly given that Iran’s air defenses, once considered formidable, have been severely degraded by Israeli operations.
Former Post editor-in-chief Yaakov Katz wrote in 2022 that “even if the ‘Begin Doctrine’ exists, it does not mean that Israel will always be able to implement it.” He observed that, unlike Iraq and Syria, Iran has scattered its nuclear program across multiple fortified locations. But Katz also emphasized that Begin’s 1981 strike “set a new standard for Israeli leaders”: that if preemptive action is possible, it must be considered – especially when survival is at stake.
Critics of the doctrine often cite the risk of escalation. Indeed, Olmert was warned by then-IDF chief Gabi Ashkenazi that there was at least a 50% chance Syria would retaliate with force after the 2007 strike. But that retaliation never came. Nor did any from Iraq in 1981. These were not reckless gambles – they were calculated decisions that removed existential threats.
This is not a theoretical threat
With Iran, the threat is not theoretical. It is real, persistent, and nearing the point of no return. Tehran has openly called for Israel’s destruction and continues to enrich uranium well beyond civilian levels. Should it cross the threshold, there may be no turning back.
Israel has every right to coordinate with its allies – but it must not outsource its sovereignty. No American president – past, present, or future – will bear the consequences of a nuclear Iran. Only Israel will.
Begin understood this. His legacy is not merely one of resolve, but of responsibility. In 1981, he said: “We shall defend our people with all the means at our disposal.”
That moment is here again. The Begin Doctrine must not remain a historical memory. It must be a living policy.
Israel must prepare to act – alone if necessary – and soon.