Amit Segal: Netanyahu's June 7 decision not to seize enriched uranium was the missed strategic opportunity of the war

The Strategic Crossroads of June 7

According to an analysis by Amit Segal, June 7 marked a pivotal moment in the conflict with Iran. Following an Iranian missile attack, Prime Minister Netanyahu faced intense pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to exercise restraint. Despite this, Netanyahu reportedly told Trump, "A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do," leading to immediate Israeli airstrikes. However, Segal argues that the choice of targets—while devastating to Iran's military infrastructure and missile factories—missed the ultimate goal: the irreversible neutralization of the nuclear threat.

The 'Uranium Operation' That Wasn't

Segal quotes two high-ranking security officials who claim that a military operation to seize Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was a viable option. The officials suggest that instead of dispersing fire across broad targets, Israel should have focused on the physical removal of the nuclear material. The report indicates that the military's hesitation, or the wait for American approval that never came, resulted in a campaign that eliminated nuclear scientists but left the core material—roughly 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%—potentially recoverable.

Analysis: Confirmed Strikes vs. Inferred Opportunities

While the extensive damage to Iranian assets is confirmed, the feasibility of a ground or special forces operation to seize uranium remains a matter of intense internal debate. Former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has previously echoed these sentiments, suggesting that such a move could have set Iran back 30 years. The tension lies between the verified operational success of the air strikes and the strategic critique that these strikes, however powerful, did not achieve a "total victory" because the regime's nuclear crown jewels remained in place.

Outlook for the Nuclear Limbo

Segal concludes that the current situation leaves President Trump in a difficult position: caught between a refusal to sign a deal that removes sanctions and a reluctance to resume full-scale hostilities. The analyst suggests that the window for a "uranium operation" may not be closed operationally, but the political barrier remains the American aversion to "boots on the ground." For Israel, the lesson of June 7 serves as a reminder that in the shadow of the Iranian threat, the difference between a successful strike and a strategic victory lies in the permanence of the result.