“Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”: the chilling quote from the sacred Hindu scripture the Bhagavad Gita was what passed through the mind of J Robert Oppenheimer as he witnessed the successful first test of the nuclear weapon he had engineered in 1945.
The great Jewish-American scientist was thinking not of a threat – understandable though it would have been in the war against the evil of the Axis powers – but of a warning of the apocalyptic harm humanity could now inflict in a flash.
Flash forward to some time in the not too distant future.
Iran completes its first successful test of an atomic bomb to announce itself to the world as a nuclear power.
What, then, would be the thoughts of the leaders of the Islamic Republic as they witnessed the same mushroom cloud Oppenheimer first saw?
American atomic scientist Julius Robert Oppenheimer (1904 - 1967) arrives in Paris to give a series of lectures at the Faculty of Science. (Image: Getty Images)Getty Images
Would they vow to make good on their long-standing pledge to destroy the State of Israel?
Or, at first, simply use the implied threat of their nuclear capability to inflict conventional terror at an unprecedented level across the region through their proxies, believing now they could act with utter of impunity because of the fear of escalation?
It is to prevent exactly these scenarios ever becoming a reality that Israel has for decades waged its ceaseless campaign against the Islamic Republic, from the long-standing operations of attrition, subterfuge and targeted assassinations, to the “hot" conflict of missile exchanges in open warfare last year and this.
Somehow, it seems the paramount importance of preventing Iran ever acquiring a nuclear capability has become lost in the intense diplomatic activity and wider media coverage of recent weeks.
Take the talks in Switzerland, where American and Iranian negotiators have gathered in search of a deal.
It seems the greatest concerns have been threats from President Trump, calculated displays for the cameras, and the Iranian delegation’s refusal to participate in a photo opportunity.
The spectacle served as a reminder of how wide the gulf remains between Washington and Tehran, despite years of intermittent diplomacy.
If President Trump’s rhetoric was intended to project strength, he risked underestimating Tehran’s capacity for patience and leverage. Iran has long understood the power of the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow artery through which a significant share of global energy supplies flows. Any disruption there would carry consequences far beyond the Gulf.
Tehran continues to play a longer and more calculated game. The regime has repeatedly shown an ability to absorb pressure. Mr Trump threatens loudly, Iranian strategists calculate and undermine.
Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, denounced the “desperation” of the US after Trump threatened to “take over” the Strait of Hormuz there was no deal.
There can be no underestimating the importance of the continued flow of oil to the global economy.
But for Israel nothing can be more paramount that what is ultimately an existential threat from Iran.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put it at the centre of the conflict when he spoke to the nation on Sunday, saying without this year’s Operation Rising Lion and the 2026 campaign Operation Roaring Lion “Iran would have had atomic bombs, and let me tell you something. They would have used them.
“That’s what we prevented.”
President Masoud Pezeshkian has insisted that Tehran is willing to provide written guarantees that it has no intention of building an atomic bomb, for whatever they’re worth.
But it seems the Islamic Republic’s enrichment programme is not up for negotiation: remember, it was only recently that international inspectors found Iran had produced uranium at 60 per cent purity, far in excess of anything with civil application and worrying close to the 90 per cent threshold needed for a weapon, along with the final technological steps.
Pezeshkian protested: “What the United States demands is that Iran not build an atomic bomb. This is nothing new, and we can also state in writing that we have no intention of building a bomb.
“However, we will not relinquish our right to enrichment, and the other side will have no choice but to accept this right.”
Air strikes by the US and Israel have severely damaged key elements of Iran’s nuclear programme.
The results include severe damage to some enrichment facilities, eliminating senior nuclear scientists and destroying critical components of Iran’s missile programmes.
Current assessments suggest these actions may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions by a few years.
But questions remain about the whereabouts of its highly enriched uranium stockpile.
Before last year’s air strikes, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimated Iran possessed about 440 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 per cent uranium 235. After attacks on facilities at Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan, inspectors lost the ability to verify the exact status and location of that material.
The uranium is not known to be missing. Rather, its precise fate remains uncertain. Nearly a year after the strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, international inspectors still cannot verify the location and condition of a stockpile large enough, if further enriched, to fuel multiple nuclear weapons.
After the 12-day war in June 2025, Iran barred IAEA inspectors from sites struck by Israel and the United States. A month later, the UN nuclear watchdog withdrew its remaining inspectors from the country. On Monday JD Vance announced Iran would let weapons inspectors into the country. But experts say the main issue is not whether they would let the inspectors in, but what they would be permitted to do.
“They must be allowed unrestricted access, measurements, sample taking and access to records and to personnel. Otherwise, the whole thing would be a shambles.” says Ephraim Asculai, the Former Israeli Atomic Energy Commission veteran who was warning about the Iranian threat as far back as 2002.
Today, he argues that the world still does not know exactly what happened to Iran’s most sensitive nuclear material.
That is why the issue remains crucial: whether the uranium was destroyed, buried, relocated or remains accessible somewhere within Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
While governments have debated how much damage was inflicted on sites such as Natanz and Fordow, Asculai believes the focus has been misplaced.
“The issue is not only the facilities,” he said.
“We don’t know the material balance in all its qualities and forms”
“We don’t know where it is.”
According to Asculai, determining whether the stockpile of highly enriched uranium remains intact is the most crucial issue, more even than the damage done to underground bunkers or the centrifuges that are critical to enrichment production.
He warns: “If they have enriched uranium, whatever the damage is to the enrichment facilities would be secondary.”
Even if enrichment plants have been damaged or destroyed, uranium that has already been enriched could potentially be stored elsewhere, moved to undisclosed locations or preserved for future use — enough to give the veteran analyst “sleepless nights”.
Tehran has repeatedly maintained that its nuclear programme is peaceful and intended solely for civilian purposes.
Israel says the evidence suggests otherwise. Iranian officials argue uranium enrichment is a sovereign right under international law and have rejected demands for a complete halt.
Asculai says simply: “The Iranians are not telling the truth. “They have to come completely clean.”
Any future agreement must go beyond counting centrifuges and monitoring enrichment levels, he urges.
Instead, inspectors must establish a complete picture of Iran’s nuclear activities, including any possible work related to weaponisation.
But don’t look back to previous international diplomatic attempts to rein in Iran’s nuclear programme, warns Asculai.
He reserves particular criticism for the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) deal agreed by President Barack Obama and EU partners.
He agrees with those critics who claim it simply “kicked the can down the road”, with restrictions that merely delayed rather than eliminated the threat of the bomb .
“The JCPOA was a flawed agreement,” Asculai said.
“It lacked many, many details.”
He fears negotiators could once again prioritise securing a diplomatic breakthrough over resolving the fundamental questions, most of all the issue of future enrichment.
“My personal impression is that the Americans want simply again to reach some sort of agreement and say that all is well.”
Meanwhile, Iran retains the scientific expertise, engineering knowledge and trained personnel necessary to rebuild its bomb programme, Asculai fears.
Even a successful military campaign would likely only buy time.
What will happen if negotiators once again failed to address these critical questions?
“If they’re not taking the nuclear issue seriously, imposing strict and all-inclusive verification mechanisms, then all could be lost. The Iranians could then proceed with their nuclear weapons development programme almost unhindered.”
Netanyahu remains resolved to stop Iran acquiring nuclear capability and to ensure Israel’s survival.
He restated that commitment this week as he spoke at the grave of his brother, Yoni Netanyahu, the IDF hero who died in the raid on Entebbe half a century ago. “I pledge here at your grave, Yoni, and I pledge before you, citizens of Israel: the State of Israel will not be a fleeting episode in the history of our people. We are steadfast in protecting our vital interests.”
Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of elite special reconnaisance IDF unit Sayeret Matkal lay a wreath on his broher Yoni Netanyahu’s grave on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem, June 20, 2026, on the 50th anniversary of his death. Photo by Kobi Gideon/GPO.[Missing Credit]
Whatever the outcome of this year’s election, any future prime minister will be unbending on the core questions of security. The commitment of Israel’s forces to the prevention of a nuclear-armed Islamic Republic will remain the number one priority.
To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.