Israel’s chief of staff, Zamir, held a series of concentrated meetings in Washington this weekend with senior U.S. military leaders to discuss the possibility of strikes on Iran and tighter operational coordination between the two countries.
Zamir met with U.S. Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Kain, focusing on scenarios for military action against Iran and on how U.S. and Israeli forces could operate together tactically if a decision were taken. The visit follows a separate meeting in Israel between Zamir and the commander of U.S. Central Command, Cooper, indicating sustained and high-level military dialogue on the issue.
Israeli military sources say one important aim of the consultations is to secure timely warning from the United States before any potential Israeli strike on Iranian territory, allowing Israel to harden defenses and prepare civilian and military protective measures. That request for advanced notification underscores both the complexity of any such operation and Israel’s concern about the retaliatory risks posed by Iran and its regional proxies.
The talks come against a backdrop of long-standing tensions over Iran’s nuclear and missile programmes and a pattern of clandestine strikes, sabotage and intelligence operations attributed to Israel. A coordinated approach with Washington would not only improve the chances of operational success but also shape responsibility, escalation control and post-strike diplomacy.
For Washington, the consultations present a familiar dilemma: how to reassure a key regional partner while avoiding entanglement in a wider conflict that could rapidly escalate across the Gulf and Levant. U.S. involvement in planning, intelligence-sharing or provision of warning would offer Israel material benefits but also expose the U.S. to political and security ramifications if a strike sparks widespread retaliation.
The immediate international significance is twofold. First, any credible planning for strikes against Iran raises the risk of military escalation across a volatile region, with consequences for global energy markets and international shipping lanes. Second, the level of U.S.-Israeli tactical coordination will be watched closely by Tehran, its regional allies, and global capitals as a bellwether of how far Washington is willing to align itself with Israeli military initiatives.
In the near term, attention should focus on indicators such as the movement of U.S. forces in the region, changes in Israeli defensive posture, and public statements from Tehran and allied militias. Those signals will help determine whether the talks were precautionary contingency planning or a step towards an imminent operational timeline.
Whatever the immediate outcome, the high-profile nature of these discussions reinforces that Israel and the United States remain deeply engaged on the Iran question. The contours of their military cooperation — from intelligence-sharing to warning protocols and tactical coordination — will shape the crisis-management environment should a confrontation occur.